L R Iwasaki1, Y M Gonzalez, H Liu, D B Marx, L M Gallo, J C Nickel. 1. Departments of Orthodontics & Dentofacial Orthopedics and Oral & Craniofacial Sciences, School of Dentistry, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine differences in masticatory muscle usage between temporomandibular joint disorders diagnostic groups. SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: Seventy-one informed and consented subjects (27 men; 44 women) participated at the University at Buffalo. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Research diagnostic criteria and imaging data were used to categorize subjects according to the presence/absence +/- of TMJ disc placement (DD) and chronic pain (P) (+DD+P, n=18; +DD-P, n=14; -DD-P, n=39). Electromyographic (EMG)/bite-force calibrations determined subject-specific masseter and temporalis muscle activities per 20 N bite-force (T20N , μV). Over 3 days and nights, subjects collected EMG recordings. Duty factors (DFs, % of recording time) were determined based on threshold intervals (5-9, 10-24, 25-49, 50-79, ≥80% T20N ). anova and Tukey-Kramer post hoc tests identified 1) diagnostic group differences in T20N and 2) the effects of diagnostic group, gender, time and interval on muscle DFs. RESULTS: Mean (±SE) temporalis T20N in +DD+P subjects was significantly higher (71.4±8.8 μV) than masseter T20N in these subjects (19.6±8.8 μV; p=0.001) and in -DD-P subjects (25.3±6.0 μV, p=0.0007). Masseter DFs at 5-9% T20N were significantly higher in +DD-P women (3.48%) than +DD-P men (0.85%) and women and men in both other diagnostic groups (all p<0.03), and in +DD+P women (2.00%) compared to -DD-P men (0.83%; p=0.029). Night-time DFs at 5-9% T20N in +DD-P women (1.97%) were significantly higher than in -DD-P men (0.47%) and women (0.24%; all p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Between-group differences were found in masticatory muscle activities in both laboratory and natural environmental settings.
OBJECTIVE: To determine differences in masticatory muscle usage between temporomandibular joint disorders diagnostic groups. SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: Seventy-one informed and consented subjects (27 men; 44 women) participated at the University at Buffalo. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Research diagnostic criteria and imaging data were used to categorize subjects according to the presence/absence +/- of TMJ disc placement (DD) and chronic pain (P) (+DD+P, n=18; +DD-P, n=14; -DD-P, n=39). Electromyographic (EMG)/bite-force calibrations determined subject-specific masseter and temporalis muscle activities per 20 N bite-force (T20N , μV). Over 3 days and nights, subjects collected EMG recordings. Duty factors (DFs, % of recording time) were determined based on threshold intervals (5-9, 10-24, 25-49, 50-79, ≥80% T20N ). anova and Tukey-Kramer post hoc tests identified 1) diagnostic group differences in T20N and 2) the effects of diagnostic group, gender, time and interval on muscle DFs. RESULTS: Mean (±SE) temporalis T20N in +DD+P subjects was significantly higher (71.4±8.8 μV) than masseter T20N in these subjects (19.6±8.8 μV; p=0.001) and in -DD-P subjects (25.3±6.0 μV, p=0.0007). Masseter DFs at 5-9% T20N were significantly higher in +DD-Pwomen (3.48%) than +DD-Pmen (0.85%) and women and men in both other diagnostic groups (all p<0.03), and in +DD+Pwomen (2.00%) compared to -DD-Pmen (0.83%; p=0.029). Night-time DFs at 5-9% T20N in +DD-Pwomen (1.97%) were significantly higher than in -DD-Pmen (0.47%) and women (0.24%; all p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Between-group differences were found in masticatory muscle activities in both laboratory and natural environmental settings.
Authors: Eric L Schiffman; Edmond L Truelove; Richard Ohrbach; Gary C Anderson; Mike T John; Thomas List; John O Look Journal: J Orofac Pain Date: 2010
Authors: Nobuhiko Kawai; Eiji Tanaka; Geerling E J Langenbach; Tim van Wessel; Peter Brugman; Ryota Sano; Theo M G J van Eijden; Kazuo Tanne Journal: Eur J Oral Sci Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 2.612
Authors: Laura R Iwasaki; Michael J Crosby; Yoly Gonzalez; Willard D McCall; David B Marx; Richard Ohrbach; Jeffrey C Nickel Journal: Orthop Rev (Pavia) Date: 2009
Authors: K G Raphael; M N Janal; D A Sirois; B Dubrovsky; P E Wigren; J J Klausner; A C Krieger; G J Lavigne Journal: J Oral Rehabil Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 3.837
Authors: Karen G Raphael; David A Sirois; Malvin N Janal; Pia E Wigren; Boris Dubrovsky; Lena V Nemelivsky; Jack J Klausner; Ana C Krieger; Gilles J Lavigne Journal: J Am Dent Assoc Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 3.634
Authors: Paige Covington Riddle; Jeffrey C Nickel; Ying Liu; Yoly M Gonzalez; Luigi M Gallo; R Scott Conley; Robert Dunford; Hongzeng Liu; Laura R Iwasaki Journal: Angle Orthod Date: 2020-11-01 Impact factor: 2.079
Authors: F Wei; M H Van Horn; M C Coombs; X She; T S Gonzales; Y M Gonzalez; J M Scott; L R Iwasaki; J C Nickel; H Yao Journal: J Oral Rehabil Date: 2017-05-20 Impact factor: 3.837
Authors: Y Wu; S E Cisewski; F Wei; X She; T S Gonzales; L R Iwasaki; J C Nickel; H Yao Journal: Orthod Craniofac Res Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 1.826
Authors: Magdalini Thymi; Frank Lobbezoo; Ghizlane Aarab; Jari Ahlberg; Kazuyoshi Baba; Maria Clotilde Carra; Luigi M Gallo; Antoon De Laat; Daniele Manfredini; Gilles Lavigne; Peter Svensson Journal: J Oral Rehabil Date: 2021-05-02 Impact factor: 3.558