CPAP vs Mandibular Advancement Splint MAS – Which is right for me? May 20, 2026 This article is for general informational purposes only and should not be used to replace medical advice. Always consult your doctor or healthcare team before making any changes to your sleep or health routine. CPAP vs MAS: Which Sleep Apnea Treatment Is Right for You? If you've been diagnosed with snoring or obstructive sleep apnea, one of the first questions you may have is - which treatment is right for me? Two of the most common options are CPAP and a mandibular advancement splint, often called an MAS. While both aim to improve your breathing during sleep, they work in very different ways and suit different people. How CPAP and MAS Work A CPAP device is a bedside machine that works by gently blowing air through a mask, keeping your airway open and eliminating symptoms.1 It provides strong airway support and is often recommended for people with moderate to severe sleep apnea.2 In contrast, a mandibular advancement splint such as the Hushd Pro Avera works mechanically by repositioning your jaw.3 It is worn inside the mouth, similar to a mouthguard, and gently holds your lower jaw forward to keep the airway open.3 This simple shift can make a significant difference to how you breathe during sleep. Who Each Option Is Best Suited For Mandibular advancement splints are commonly used for snoring and mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnea.2 They are also a good option for people who cannot tolerate CPAP or prefer a simpler and more portable solution.2 To use this type of device, you need healthy teeth and a stable jaw, as it relies on your dental structure for support.2 CPAP is typically recommended for moderate to severe sleep apnea, where stronger airway support is needed.2 It does not rely on your teeth or jaw, so it can be used in a wider range of patients. For patients with mild to moderate sleep apnea, mandibular advancement devices are comparable to CPAP in effectiveness.2 However, if you have symptoms beyond snoring, such as significant daytime tiredness or headaches, CPAP may still be recommended as a first option in some cases. Comfort, Lifestyle, and Ease of Use One of the biggest differences between these options is how they fit into your daily life. An MAS is small, discreet, and easy to use. It does not require power, makes no noise, and is easy to take with you when travelling. Many people find it more comfortable and easier to stick with long term.4 CPAP, on the other hand, involves a mask and machine that needs to be set up each night. Some people find it takes time to get used to, and it can feel more noticeable during sleep. Making the Right Choice for You There is no one-size-fits-all answer. The right treatment depends on the severity of your sleep apnea, your symptoms, your comfort preferences, and your overall health. If you are experiencing symptoms such as loud snoring, poor sleep, or daytime fatigue, it is important to seek professional advice. Speak with your doctor or a qualified sleep professional to explore your options and find the treatment that works best for you. Better sleep starts with the right support. ALWAYS FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS FOR USE. MAS is intended to reduce or alleviate snoring and mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in adults. CPAP is used for Obstructive Sleep Apnoea treatment. To find out if CPAP or a MAS is suitable for you, speak to your doctor. References 1 Katella, Kathy. “7 Things to Know about Sleep Apnea and CPAP.” Yale Medicine, 18 Apr. 2022, www.yalemedicine.org/news/sleep-apnea-cpap. 2 “RACGP - Mandibular Devices for Obstructive Sleep Apnoea.” Racgp.org.au, 2018, www.racgp.org.au/clinical-resources/clinical-guidelines/handi/handi-interventions/device/mandibular-devices-for-obstructive-sleep-apnoea. 3 “Sleep Apnea Treatment without CPAP | Good Sleep Co Australia.” Good Sleep Co, 2026, goodsleepco.health/pages/treatment. 4 Manetta, Izabella Paola, et al. “Mandibular Advancement Devices in Obstructive Sleep Apnea: An Updated Review.” Sleep Science, vol. 15, 2022, pp. 398–405, https://doi.org/10.5935/1984-0063.20210032.
