Smartphone-based evaluation of awake bruxism behaviours in a sample of healthy young adults: findings from two University centres.
awake bruxism
bruxism
ecological momentary assessment
prevalence
smartphone
Journal
Journal of oral rehabilitation
ISSN: 1365-2842
Titre abrégé: J Oral Rehabil
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0433604
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2021
Sep 2021
Historique:
revised:
24
03
2021
received:
06
11
2020
accepted:
18
05
2021
pubmed:
28
5
2021
medline:
17
8
2021
entrez:
27
5
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
A smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment (EMA) strategy was used to assess the frequency of awake bruxism behaviours, based on the report of five oral conditions (ie relaxed jaw muscles, teeth contact, mandible bracing, teeth clenching and teeth grinding). One hundred and fifty-three (N = 153) healthy young adults (mean ± SD age = 22.9 ± 3.2 years), recruited in two different Italian Universities, used a dedicated smartphone application that sent 20 alerts/day at random times for seven days. Upon alert receipt, the subjects had to report in real-time one of the above five possible oral conditions. Individual data were used to calculate an average frequency of the study population for each day. For each condition, a coefficient of variation (CV) of frequency data was calculated as the ratio between SD and mean values over the seven recording days. Average frequency of the different behaviours over the seven days was as follows: relaxed jaw muscle, 76.4%; teeth contact, 13.6%; mandible bracing, 7.0%; teeth clenching, 2.5%; and teeth grinding, 0.5%. No significant differences were found in frequency data between the two University samples. The relaxed jaw muscles condition was more frequent in males (80.7 ± 17.7) than in females (73.4 ± 22.2). The frequency of relaxed jaw muscles condition over the period of observation had a very low coefficient of variation (0.27), while for the different awake bruxism behaviours, CV was in a range between 1.5 (teeth contact) and 4.3 (teeth grinding). Teeth contact was the most prevalent behaviour (57.5-69.7). Findings from this investigation suggest that the average frequency of AB behaviours over one week, investigated using EMA-approach, is around 23.6%.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34041773
doi: 10.1111/joor.13212
pmc: PMC8453860
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
989-995Informations de copyright
© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Oral Rehabilitation published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Clin Oral Investig. 2020 Apr;24(4):1395-1400
pubmed: 31646395
J Oral Rehabil. 2018 Nov;45(11):837-844
pubmed: 29926505
Cranio. 2005 Jul;23(3):188-93
pubmed: 16128353
J Oral Rehabil. 2018 Jun;45(6):423-429
pubmed: 29574964
Minerva Stomatol. 2016 Aug;65(4):252-5
pubmed: 27374364
J Oral Rehabil. 2014 Mar;41(3):170-6
pubmed: 24447128
Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2008;4:1-32
pubmed: 18509902
J Oral Rehabil. 2020 Feb;47(2):158-163
pubmed: 31418908
J Orofac Pain. 2013 Spring;27(2):99-110
pubmed: 23630682
J Oral Rehabil. 2020 May;47(5):549-556
pubmed: 31999846
Front Neurol. 2019 Mar 05;10:170
pubmed: 30890999
Br J Health Psychol. 2010 Feb;15(Pt 1):1-39
pubmed: 19646331
J Dent Res. 1996 Jan;75(1):546-52
pubmed: 8655758
J Oral Rehabil. 2013 Aug;40(8):631-42
pubmed: 23700983
J Oral Facial Pain Headache. 2016 Spring;30(2):107-19
pubmed: 27128474
J Oral Rehabil. 2008 Jul;35(7):476-94
pubmed: 18557915
J Dent Res. 2016 Apr;95(4):416-22
pubmed: 26758381
J Oral Rehabil. 2013 Jan;40(1):2-4
pubmed: 23121262
J Oral Rehabil. 2013 Nov;40(11):803-9
pubmed: 24112029
Front Neurol. 2019 Mar 01;10:169
pubmed: 30881335
J Oral Rehabil. 2021 Sep;48(9):989-995
pubmed: 34041773
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010 Jun;109(6):e26-50
pubmed: 20451831
J Oral Rehabil. 2008 Jul;35(7):495-508
pubmed: 18557916
J Orofac Pain. 2007 Summer;21(3):185-93
pubmed: 17717957
Front Psychol. 2015 May 06;6:481
pubmed: 25999869