Daisuke Takagi1,2, Yutaka Watanabe3,4, Ayako Edahiro3, Yuki Ohara5, Masaharu Murakami3, Kohji Murakami1, Shouji Hironaka1, Yu Taniguchi3, Akihiko Kitamura3, Shoji Shinkai3, Hirohiko Hirano6. 1. Department of Special Needs Dentistry, Division of Hygiene and Oral Health, Showa University School of Dentistry, Tokyo, Japan. 2. Department of Critical Care Medicine and Dentistry, Division of Medically Compromised Geriatric Dentistry Graduate School of Dentistry, Kanagawa Dental University, Yokosuka, Japan. 3. Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Gerontology, Tokyo, Japan. 4. National Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, Aichi, Japan. 5. Department of Oral Health Care Education, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Science, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo, Japan. 6. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Gerontology, Tokyo, Japan.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine relevant factors for subjective and objective assessment of masticatory functions and elucidate any differences between the two methods. BACKGROUND: Previous studies have reported that the results of subjective and objective assessment of masticatory function in older people do not necessarily agree. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 487 community-dwelling Japanese older people (205 male and 282 female; mean age 74.1±6.3 years) who participated in a comprehensive geriatric health examination. Basic information (gender and age), higher level of competence in daily living, depression, subjective masticatory function (SMF) and objective masticatory function (OMF) assessments, cognitive function, skeletal muscle mass, handgrip strength, gait speed and oral status (number of remaining and functional teeth, mouth dryness and occlusal force) were recorded. RESULTS: Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that depression (odds ratio [OR]: 1.181, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.094-1.275), mouth dryness (OR: 2.037, CI: 1.212-3.423) and occlusal force (OR: 0.997, CI: 0.996-0.999) were significantly associated with SMF, whereas higher level of competence in daily living (OR: 0.730 CI: 0.586-0.910), skeletal muscle mass (OR: 0.521 CI: 0.283-0.960), number of functional teeth (OR: 0.862 CI: 0.775-0.959), number of remaining teeth (OR: 0.868 CI: 0.810-0.930) and occlusal force (OR: 0.994, CI: 0.991-0.998) were associated with OMF. CONCLUSION: Subjective masticatory functionSMF and OMF were associated with different factors, suggesting that both mental and physical factors should be taken into consideration when treating decreased masticatory function.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine relevant factors for subjective and objective assessment of masticatory functions and elucidate any differences between the two methods. BACKGROUND: Previous studies have reported that the results of subjective and objective assessment of masticatory function in older people do not necessarily agree. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 487 community-dwelling Japanese older people (205 male and 282 female; mean age 74.1±6.3 years) who participated in a comprehensive geriatric health examination. Basic information (gender and age), higher level of competence in daily living, depression, subjective masticatory function (SMF) and objective masticatory function (OMF) assessments, cognitive function, skeletal muscle mass, handgrip strength, gait speed and oral status (number of remaining and functional teeth, mouth dryness and occlusal force) were recorded. RESULTS: Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that depression (odds ratio [OR]: 1.181, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.094-1.275), mouth dryness (OR: 2.037, CI: 1.212-3.423) and occlusal force (OR: 0.997, CI: 0.996-0.999) were significantly associated with SMF, whereas higher level of competence in daily living (OR: 0.730 CI: 0.586-0.910), skeletal muscle mass (OR: 0.521 CI: 0.283-0.960), number of functional teeth (OR: 0.862 CI: 0.775-0.959), number of remaining teeth (OR: 0.868 CI: 0.810-0.930) and occlusal force (OR: 0.994, CI: 0.991-0.998) were associated with OMF. CONCLUSION: Subjective masticatory functionSMF and OMF were associated with different factors, suggesting that both mental and physical factors should be taken into consideration when treating decreased masticatory function.
Authors: Per Elgestad Stjernfeldt; Gerd Faxén Irving; Inger Wårdh; Robert Lundqvist; Angelika Lantto Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-05-10 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Gloria C Mejia; Hawazin W Elani; Sam Harper; W Murray Thomson; Xiangqun Ju; Ichiro Kawachi; Jay S Kaufman; Lisa M Jamieson Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2018-10-26 Impact factor: 2.757
Authors: Seonhui Kim; Re-Mee Doh; Leegang Yoo; Sol-Ah Jeong; Bock-Young Jung Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-06-27 Impact factor: 3.390