The Preferred Chewing Side in Partially Edentulous Patients Is More Related to Residual Dentition Than Hemispheric Laterality

IF 4 3区医学 Q1 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Journal of oral rehabilitation Pub Date : 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1111/joor.13955

Quentin Olivieri, Sabrina Maniewicz, Najla Chebib, Philippe Mojon, Frauke Müller

{"title":"The Preferred Chewing Side in Partially Edentulous Patients Is More Related to Residual Dentition Than Hemispheric Laterality","authors":"Quentin Olivieri, Sabrina Maniewicz, Najla Chebib, Philippe Mojon, Frauke Müller","doi":"10.1111/joor.13955","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background/Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>The aim of this study was to examine if a person's preferred chewing side (PCS) corresponds to his/her hemispheric body laterality (HBL) or is dominated by the dental state.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>After ethical approval, 82 volunteers were recruited. Asymmetry of bite force (ABF) was tested using an occlusal force-meter (GM-10) on both sides separately. The occlusal contact area (OCA) was observed using a pressure-indicating film (GC Fujifilm Prescale). The PCS was evaluated using an asymmetry index (ASI) or a visual analogue scale (VAS). Both tests were repeated. For the HBL, participants underwent four different tests to assess handedness, footedness, earedness and eyedness, respectively. Statistical analysis comprised kappa agreement for HBL tests and their repetition, as well as paired Wilcoxon tests for intraoral parameters.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Hand, eye and ear showed a substantial reproducibility, while foot produced moderate agreement (kappa = 0.58, <i>p</i> < 0.001). No correlation was found between a participant's PCS and HBL, with the exception of EAR with VAS (kappa = 0.29, <i>p</i> = 0.001). There was a significant correlation between ABF and the number of residual teeth (NNT) both for PCS (<i>p</i> < 0.01; <i>r</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.29) and NPCS (<i>p</i> < 0.01; <i>r</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.18). There was no significant difference between PCS and NPCS for OCA (<i>p</i> = 0.13). The results revealed a significantly higher number of residual posterior teeth on the participant's PCS (for VAS <i>p</i> < 0.0001; ASI <i>p</i> < 0.03).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Masticatory laterality does not correspond to body hemispheric laterality. Rather than HBL, the number of residual teeth seems to determine on which side a person prefers to chew.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16605,"journal":{"name":"Journal of oral rehabilitation","volume":"52 7","pages":"949-956"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of oral rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joor.13955","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Objectives

The aim of this study was to examine if a person's preferred chewing side (PCS) corresponds to his/her hemispheric body laterality (HBL) or is dominated by the dental state.

Methods

After ethical approval, 82 volunteers were recruited. Asymmetry of bite force (ABF) was tested using an occlusal force-meter (GM-10) on both sides separately. The occlusal contact area (OCA) was observed using a pressure-indicating film (GC Fujifilm Prescale). The PCS was evaluated using an asymmetry index (ASI) or a visual analogue scale (VAS). Both tests were repeated. For the HBL, participants underwent four different tests to assess handedness, footedness, earedness and eyedness, respectively. Statistical analysis comprised kappa agreement for HBL tests and their repetition, as well as paired Wilcoxon tests for intraoral parameters.

Results

Hand, eye and ear showed a substantial reproducibility, while foot produced moderate agreement (kappa = 0.58, p < 0.001). No correlation was found between a participant's PCS and HBL, with the exception of EAR with VAS (kappa = 0.29, p = 0.001). There was a significant correlation between ABF and the number of residual teeth (NNT) both for PCS (p < 0.01; r² = 0.29) and NPCS (p < 0.01; r² = 0.18). There was no significant difference between PCS and NPCS for OCA (p = 0.13). The results revealed a significantly higher number of residual posterior teeth on the participant's PCS (for VAS p < 0.0001; ASI p < 0.03).

Conclusion

Masticatory laterality does not correspond to body hemispheric laterality. Rather than HBL, the number of residual teeth seems to determine on which side a person prefers to chew.

Abstract Image

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

部分无牙患者的首选咀嚼侧与残留牙列的关系大于与半球偏侧的关系。

背景/目的：本研究的目的是研究一个人的首选咀嚼侧位（PCS）是否与他/她的半球体侧位（HBL）相对应，还是由牙齿状态主导。方法：经伦理审批，招募志愿者82名。用咬合力计（GM-10）分别在两侧检测咬合力不对称性。使用压力指示膜（GC fujifilprecale）观察咬合接触面积（OCA）。PCS采用不对称指数（ASI）或视觉模拟量表（VAS）进行评估。两项测试都重复了一遍。对于HBL，参与者分别接受了四种不同的测试来评估手性、脚性、耳性和视力。统计分析包括HBL测试的kappa一致性及其重复，以及口腔内参数的配对Wilcoxon测试。结果：手、眼、耳具有较好的重复性，足部具有中等程度的一致性（kappa = 0.58, p 2 = 0.29）和NPCS （p 2 = 0.18）。PCS与NPCS在OCA方面无显著差异（p = 0.13）。结论：咀嚼侧度与身体半球侧度不一致。比起HBL，残留牙齿的数量似乎决定了一个人更喜欢咀嚼哪一边。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Journal of oral rehabilitation 医学-牙科与口腔外科

CiteScore

5.60

自引率

10.30%

发文量

116

审稿时长

4-8 weeks

期刊介绍： Journal of Oral Rehabilitation aims to be the most prestigious journal of dental research within all aspects of oral rehabilitation and applied oral physiology. It covers all diagnostic and clinical management aspects necessary to re-establish a subjective and objective harmonious oral function. Oral rehabilitation may become necessary as a result of developmental or acquired disturbances in the orofacial region, orofacial traumas, or a variety of dental and oral diseases (primarily dental caries and periodontal diseases) and orofacial pain conditions. As such, oral rehabilitation in the twenty-first century is a matter of skilful diagnosis and minimal, appropriate intervention, the nature of which is intimately linked to a profound knowledge of oral physiology, oral biology, and dental and oral pathology. The scientific content of the journal therefore strives to reflect the best of evidence-based clinical dentistry. Modern clinical management should be based on solid scientific evidence gathered about diagnostic procedures and the properties and efficacy of the chosen intervention (e.g. material science, biological, toxicological, pharmacological or psychological aspects). The content of the journal also reflects documentation of the possible side-effects of rehabilitation, and includes prognostic perspectives of the treatment modalities chosen.