Objective: The efficacy of many of the noninvasive treatments for snoring has not been evaluated in controlled trials. This paper seeks to evaluate the efficacy of an oil-based spray in the treatment of snoring, in a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial using objective acoustic analysis and subjective questionnaires.
Study design and setting: Participants were randomized to use both oil-based oral spray (treatment) and water-based oral spray (placebo) during a two-night in-home study period. Questionnaires were completed by participant and bed-partner in addition to audio-tape 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): benefit = 17%, no change = 33%, adverse effect = 50%. Bed-partner observations (n = 17) demonstrated 37% = benefit; 38% = no change; 25% = adverse effect.
Conclusion/significance: 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.