Psychosocial and Behavioral Factors in Awake Bruxism-Self-Report versus Ecological Momentary Assessment.

Alona Emodi-Perlman,Daniele Manfredini,Ilana Eli,Pessia Frideman-Rubin,Alessandro Bracci,Tamar Shalev

doi:10.3390/jcm10194447

Alona Emodi-Perlman, Daniele Manfredini + Show 4 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm10194447

Copy DOI

Abstract

The issue of psychosocial factors and concurrent conditions associated with AB is a relatively new approach in the study of Awake Bruxism (AB). In the present study a population of 84 dental students were assessed for probable AB with two modes of AB assessment: Single point self-report (SR) and ecological momentary assessment through a designated smartphone application (BA). The two assessment modes were compared with regard to their ability to phenotype subjects as far as the following psychosocial and behavioral variables are concerned: Gender; depression; somatization; oral behaviors; chronic pain and associated pain symptoms in the head, neck and scapula. Two-way ANOVA showed main effect of SR for the following variables: Chronic Pain Intensity score (F(1,49) = 6.441, p < 0.02), migraine/headache (F(1,81) = 7.396, p < 0.01), pain in neck (F(1,81) = 6.726, p < 0.05), pain in scapula (F(1,81) = 8.546, p < 0.005) and the oral behaviors of pushing the tongue forcefully against the teeth (F(1,81) = 5.222, p < 0.05) and inserting the tongue between the upper and lower teeth (F(1,81) = 5.344, p < 0.03). The effect of SR on the habit of chewing gum was borderline (F(1,81) = 3.369, p = 0.07). Main effect of BA was found for depression (F(1,81) = 6.049, p < 0.05), while the effect of BA on somatization was borderline (F(1,81) = 3.657, p = 0.059). An interaction between SR and BA groups could be observed for the behavior of biting, chewing or playing with the tongue, cheeks or lips (F(1,81) = 4.117, p < 0.05). The results suggest that a combination of a single-point self-report referring to the past 30 days, and an ecological momentary assessment supplying information about the actual timing of the report, can help us to better assess AB, as well as increase our ability to define the phenotype of subjects with AB as far as psychosocial and behavioral factors are concerned.

Highlights

Awake bruxism (AB) is defined as a masticatory muscle activity during wakefulness, which is characterized by repetitive sustained tooth contact and/or bracing or thrusting of the mandible
A—dealing with assessment of bruxism; and (ii) etiological/risk factors axis B—dealing with etiology, risk factors and concurrent conditions associated with Awake Bruxism (AB)
The issue of psychosocial factors and concurrent conditions associated with AB will undoubtedly be a major factor in future AB studies

Summary

Introduction

Awake bruxism (AB) is defined as a masticatory muscle activity during wakefulness, which is characterized by repetitive sustained tooth contact and/or bracing or thrusting of the mandible. AB is not considered a movement disorder in otherwise healthy individuals [1]. The first steps towards the standardization of bruxism assessment were published [2]. The general structure is planned to rely on two axes: (i) Evaluation axis. A—dealing with assessment of bruxism (self-reports, clinical evaluation, instrumental assessment); and (ii) etiological/risk factors axis B—dealing with etiology, risk factors and concurrent conditions associated with AB. The issue of psychosocial factors and concurrent conditions associated with AB will undoubtedly be a major factor in future AB studies. Barbosa Camara-Souza et al [3]

Objectives

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion