Comparison of digital splints versus traditional splints for bruxism management: a systematic review

Abstract Background The prevalence of bruxism in the adult population varies widely. Splints are commonly used to treat bruxism, protect teeth, and alleviate the adverse effects of grinding or clenching. This systematic review aimed to compare the effectiveness of digital versus traditional splints in managing bruxism, focusing in clinical outcomes such as symptom severity, pain reduction, bruxism event frequency, and muscle activity. Methods and material A Systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive electronic database search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, Dimensions, and Google Scholar for scholarly journal articles comparing digital and traditional splints. Eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in peer-reviewed journals that investigated the effectiveness of splints in bruxism management. The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 was used to appraise the quality of the included randomized controlled trials. Results The literature search yielded 2115 records, of which eight articles met the eligibility criteria. Additionally, the risk of bias assessment results indicated that most randomized controlled trials reported a low to moderate risk of bias. This study’s findings demonstrate the superiority of digital splints over traditional splints in managing bruxism. However, this difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions Digital splints showed a tendency toward improved outcomes in managing bruxism compared to traditional splints, but the lack of statistical significance highlights the need for further research to confirm these findings.