Study of lubricant-induced changes in chronic snorers

Abstract

Problem: The efficacy of many of the noninvasive treatments for snoring has not been evaluated in controlled trials. This study seeks to evaluate the efficacy of an oil-based spray in the treatment of snoring, in a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial using objective acoustic analysis and subjective questionnaires. Methods: Participants were randomized to use both oil-based oral spray (treatment) and water-based oral spray (placebo) during a 2-night in-home study period. Questionnaires were completed by the participant and his/her bed-partner; these were evaluated along with audiotape recordings, which were analyzed for frequency, duration, and mean energy of snoring. Results: Greatest snoring rate demonstrated 30% = benefit; 40% = no change; 30% = adverse effect (n = 20). percent time snoring yielded: 30% = benefit; 15% = no change; 55% = adverse effect (n = 20). Study data results for mean energy were (n = 12): 17% = benefit; 33% = no change; 50% = adverse effect. Bed-partner observations (n = 17) demonstrated 37% = benefit; 38% = no change, 25% = adverse effect. Conclusion: Objective and subjective evaluation of the performance of the oil-based Snoreless spray in comparison to placebo demonstrated a lack of efficacy in snoring reduction. Significance: Study findings indicate that oil-based oral sprays are not effective in the treatment of snoring. Support: None reported.