Sleep bruxism (SB) in children has been associated with several sleep characteristics, which may alter their sleep pattern. This change affects the internal biological clock and consequently the chronotype profile. The aim of this study was to evaluate the existence of an association between possible SB in children with specific chronotype profiles and sleep characteristics. The study included 207 parents/guardians of children aged between 3 and 12 years who were waiting for their children's dental treatment at the Pediatric Dentistry Clinic of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. A questionnaire on the socio-demographic characteristics of parents and children as well as on the features of the children's sleep was applied. In addition, the CIRENS scale (Circadian Energy Scale) was completed by the parents to identify the children's chronotype. A chi-squared test was used to determine the association between possible SB, the chronotype, and sleep characteristics. A multiple logistic regression model was implemented to observe the influence of chronotype, age, and other independent variables on the possible SB. The logistic regression model demonstrated that nocturnal agitation (p = 0.009; OR = 3.42) and nightmares (p = 0.045; OR = 3.24) were associated with possible SB in children. Although no significant association (p = 0 .089) between the chronotype profile and possible SB was observed in the 3 to 5 years age group, a proportional difference was observed between the chronotype categories in this age group-12.5% of children with SB had a morning type, while 26.4% had an intermediate type and 47.8% an evening type compared to those without possible SB. Nocturnal agitation and nightmares were associated with possible SB. In addition, young children with an evening chronotype had a tendency toward possible SB.

No abstract

Objectives Given that current literature largely dissociates dental malocclusion and bruxism, the objective of this study was to gather, through a systematic review, scientific evidence to support their relationship. Methodology This study was performed according to the PECO strategy (where P = general population; E = dental malocclusion; C = no dental malocclusion; and O = bruxism). Literature searches were conducted without language or date restrictions in the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, the Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, LILACS/BBO via VHL and the grey literature. The search strategy included Medical Subject Headings/DECs, synonyms and free terms relevant to each database, with no age restrictions applied. Once the relevant data were extracted from the articles, the Fowkes and Fulton guidelines were followed to assess the quality and risk of bias. For quantitative analysis, dental malocclusions were divided into groups according to their type in order to perform odds ratio (OR) meta‐analyses with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using the Review Manager software program (Cochrane, London, UK). The level of certainty of evidence was demonstrated through the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Results After 1,502 studies found, 10 studies were included for qualitative analysis and nine for quantitative synthesis. Four studies presented high methodological quality. Five meta‐analyses suggested a non‐association between bruxism and Angle class I (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.41‐2.69; P = .92; I2 = 84%), Angle class II (OR: 1.49, 95% CI: 0.77‐2.87; P = .23; I2 = 71%) or Angle class III (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.31‐1.93; P = .58; I2 = 0%). Bruxism was associated with children who did not present with a posterior crossbite (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.51‐0.96; P = .03; I2 = 27%) and present crowding (OR: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.03‐2.26; P = .03; I2 = 0%). The GRADE analysis presented a very low quality of evidence. Conclusion Individuals who present with bruxism have a greater chance of crowding. However, bruxism is not associated with the presence of any of the other malocclusions evaluated.

Purpose To compare the Atraumatic Restorative Treatment (ART) associated with Brix3000™ to ART considering treatment time, pain experienced, and acceptability to children. Methods This study was accepted in Research Ethics Committee in July 2019 (number 3469402). Healthy patients ( n = 20) aged 3–9 years, with at least one primary molar with occlusal dentine caries without cusp involvement were randomly allocated to either the ART + Brix3000™ group or the ART-only group. The sample was characterised by sex, age, tooth location and caries experience. Time spent and pain experience scores were recorded at prophylaxis, caries removal and restoration. The pain experience (intense, moderate, or mild) was evaluated by the Face, Legs, Activity, Cry, Consolability-revised scale (FLACC-r). Acceptability was assessed by a five-point hedonic facial scale (dichotomised into ‘like’ and ‘indifferent/dislike’ bins) and by an open-question interview. Mann–Whitney, Chi-square, and Fisher’s exact tests were applied to discern differences in time, pain/sample characterisation and acceptability, respectively. Results The ART + Brix3000™ group required 8.6 ± 3.1 min to remove caries tissue, whereas the ART group required only 4.8 ± 2.0 min ( p = 0.03). The total time spent with treatments was 13.1 ± 4.0 min for ART + Brix3000™, and 9.8 ± 2.7 min for ART ( p = 0.03). There was no difference in pain experience and acceptability found among the groups ( p > 0.05). Conclusion Although the ART + Brix3000™ technique demanded more treatment time than the ART alone, there were no differences in either pain experience or acceptability.

Background Sleep bruxism (SB) is a masticatory muscle activity that affects children. Parents’ knowledge is important for its identification and report to dentists. Aim To investigate parents’ knowledge about SB among their children. Design A cross‐sectional study included 1325 parents of children from dental clinics of seven institutions from all regions of Brazil. Parents answered questions about child's sleep, knowledge about SB and its occurrence among children and parents. SB definition given by parents was dichotomized as “correct”/“incorrect”, based on the American Academy of Sleep Medicine definition. Descriptive, bivariate and multivariate analyses were performed (P < 0.05). Results Most parents (57.3%) did not know what SB is and 88.9% would like to receive more information. SB prevalence among parents was 15.4% and 24.0% among children. Between parents who correctly defined SB, its prevalence increased to 27.5% among parents and 40.6% among children. Parents whose children had/have SB, who would like to receive more information about SB and were from the North, Central‐West, Southeast, and South regions were more likely to define SB correctly (P > 0.05). Conclusion There is a lack of knowledge of parents about SB. SB among children, parents’ interest in receiving more information and their location were factors associated to their knowledge.