| Literature DB >> 31293926 |
Varsha Kanjani1, Rajeshwari G Annigeri1, Manjunath M Revanappa1, Abha Rani2.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Oral submucous fibrosis (OSMF) is an insidious, chronic, disabling disease that mainly affects the oral mucosa. Spirulina is a freshwater microalga which is considered as superfood by the WHO. Due to its antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, and immunomodulating properties, spirulina has shown promising results in the management of OSMF. A wide range of treatment modalities have been tried ranging from medical, physical, or surgical interventions, but combinations of these have shown better results. AIMS: The study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of spirulina along with different physiotherapeutic modalities in the management of OSMF. SETTING ANDEntities:
Keywords: Isometric exercises; mouth stretching device; oral submucous fibrosis; spirulina; threaded tapered screw
Year: 2019 PMID: 31293926 PMCID: PMC6585230 DOI: 10.4103/ams.ams_3_19
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Maxillofac Surg ISSN: 2231-0746
Figure 1Threaded tapered screw
Figure 2Fabrication of mold for preparing mouth stretching device (a-c) and preparation of mouth stretching device (d-f)
Demographic data of the patients enrolled in the study
| Parameters | Group A | Group B | Group C |
|---|---|---|---|
| Males ( | 14 | 14 | 13 |
| Females ( | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Mean age (years) | 38.3±12.8 | 31.8±9.5 | 38.8±11.6 |
Improvement in clinical parameters from baseline to 6th visit
| Group | Visits | Burning sensation (VAS) | Mouth opening (mm) | Tongue protrusion (mm) | Cheek flexibility (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group A | Baseline | 6.4±2.3 | 25.5±4.9 | 34.8±7.9 | 1.8±0.5 |
| 1st visit | 5.9±2.0 | 25.6±4.8 | 34.9±7.9 | 1.9±0.5 | |
| 2nd visit | 5.6±2.0 | 26.2±4.7 | 35.3±7.8 | 2.0±0.6 | |
| 3rd visit | 4.9±1.8 | 26.7±4.9 | 35.8±8.0 | 2.2±0.6 | |
| 4th visit | 4.2±1.9 | 27.5±4.9 | 36.3±8.0 | 2.3±0.6 | |
| 5th visit | 3.5±1.9 | 28.2±5.3 | 36.9±8.0 | 2.5±0.7 | |
| 6th visit | 2.6±1.7 | 28.8±5.1 | 37.2±8.0 | 2.6±0.7 | |
| 0.001* | 0.001* | 0.001* | 0.001* | ||
| Group B | Baseline | 6.7±2.5 | 32.0±6.9 | 45.4±8.5 | 2.2±0.5 |
| 1st visit | 6.1±2.3 | 32.4±7.0 | 45.7±8.5 | 2.3±0.6 | |
| 2nd visit | 5.6±2.2 | 33.2±7.1 | 45.9±9.3 | 2.5±0.5 | |
| 3rd visit | 5.0±2.3 | 34.4±7.0 | 46.5±9.3 | 2.8±0.6 | |
| 4th visit | 4.0±2.2 | 35.2±7.3 | 47.2±9.5 | 3.0±0.6 | |
| 5th visit | 2.9±1.9 | 36.3±7.3 | 48.8±8.6 | 3.2±0.6 | |
| 6th visit | 2.0±1.7 | 37.0±7.0 | 49.4±8.5 | 3.4±0.6 | |
| 0.001* | 0.001* | 0.001* | 0.001* | ||
| Group C | Baseline | 6.1±2.1 | 35.5±5.5 | 44.4±9.9 | 2.4±0.4 |
| 1st visit | 5.4±1.9 | 35.8±5.4 | 44.6±9.7 | 2.6±0.4 | |
| 2nd visit | 4.6±1.7 | 37.4±5.5 | 45.6±9.7 | 2.8±0.4 | |
| 3rd visit | 4.0±1.6 | 39.0±5.6 | 46.8±9.7 | 3.1±0.4 | |
| 4th visit | 3.1±1.4 | 40.5±5.6 | 47.2±9.9 | 3.4±0.3 | |
| 5th visit | 2.2±1.1 | 42.1±5.6 | 47.2±9.9 | 3.6±0.3 | |
| 6th visit | 1.1±1.2 | 43.6±5.7 | 50.3±9.8 | 3.9±0.3 | |
| 0.001* | 0.001* | 0.001* | 0.001* |
For intragroup and intergroup comparison, paired t- and unpaired t-test were used, respectively. *P<0.05 was considered as statistically significant. VAS=Visual analog scale
Figure 3Intragroup and intergroup comparison of burning sensation from baseline to 6th visit
Figure 4Intragroup and intergroup comparison of mouth opening from baseline to 6th visit
Figure 5Intragroup and intergroup comparison of tongue protrusion from baseline to 6th visit
Figure 6Intragroup and intergroup comparison of cheek flexibility from baseline to 6th visit