Correlation between self‐reported and clinically based diagnoses of bruxism in temporomandibular disorders patients

Abstract

The present investigation was performed in a population of patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD), and it was designed to assess the correlation between self-reported questionnaire-based bruxism diagnosis and a diagnosis based on history taking plus clinical examination. One-hundred-fifty-nine patients with TMD underwent an assessment including a questionnaire investigating five bruxism-related items (i.e. sleep grinding, sleep grinding referral by bed partner, sleep clenching, awake clenching, awake grinding) and an interview (i.e. oral history taking with specific focus on bruxism habits) plus a clinical examination to evaluate bruxism signs and symptoms. The correlation between findings of the questionnaire, viz., patients' report, and findings of the interview/oral history taking plus clinical examination, viz., clinicians' diagnosis, was assessed by means of φ coefficient. The highest correlations were achieved for the sleep grinding referral item (φ = 0·932) and for the awake clenching item (φ = 0·811), whilst lower correlation values were found for the other items (φ values ranging from 0·363 to 0·641). The percentage of disagreement between the two diagnostic approaches ranged between 1·8% and 18·2%. Within the limits of the present investigation, it can be suggested that a strong positive correlation between a self-reported and a clinically based approach to bruxism diagnosis can be achieved as for awake clenching, whilst lower levels of correlation were detected for sleep-time activities.

Bruxism as a neurological problem (literature review)

“…Предположить наличие у пациента ДБ или сме-шанную форму можно по дополнительным вопросам, предложенным D. A. Paesani и соавт. [22].…”

Diagnosis of Sleep Bruxism with the BruxChecker

“…Pierwsza z nich (n = 19) obejmowała osoby spełniają-ce kryteria rozpoznania bruksizmu "prawdopodobnego" w czasie snu (osoby zgłaszające bruksizm w czasie snu w ankiecie, u których w czasie wywiadu i badania klinicznego potwierdzono obecność oznak i objawów bruksizmu) [2]. Druga grupa niespełniająca tych kryteriów posłuży-ła jako grupa kontrolna (n = 29).…”

“…ROC curve for model including OM+OW was insignificantly better than those based on OM and OW separately skiej. Zarówno ankietę, jak i badanie kliniczne zdecydowano się oprzeć na regułach opisanych przez Paesani et al [2], ponieważ zgodnie z nowymi koncepcjami rozumienia zjawiska pozwalają one na odróżnienie bruksizmu w stanie czuwania (AB) od bruksizmu w czasie snu (SB) oraz zaciskania zębów od ich zgrzytania. Jest to ważne, gdyż uważa się, że AB i SB to dwa oddzielne zjawiska mające prawdopodobnie inną etiologię, przebieg i skutki [17].…”

“…Badanie podmiotowe i przedmiotowe ma na celu potwierdzenie informacji uzyskanych w ankiecie oraz ocenę występowania oznak i objawów bruksizmu, do których należą m.in. bolesność palpacyjna mięśni żucia, hipertrofia mięśni żwaczy, linie białe na policzkach, impresje zębów na języku oraz starcie zębów [2]. Żadna z tych oznak i objawów nie jest jednak dowodem na występowanie bruksizmu.…”

Magnitude of Bite Force that is Interpreted as Clenching in Patients with Temporomandibular Disorders: A Pilot Study

“…In most studies that employed a questionnaire [13][14][15][16], surveys of awake clenching were based on self-reports, and most patients were instructed by dentists to "take care to avoid clenching" and that "you should not be clenching." However, patients may be unaware of the magnitude of bite force that is equivalent to clenching; therefore, they may not be able to follow the advice of the dentist, which may adversely affect the clinical course.…”