咬合不正反咬一口:关于咬合不正对口腔摄食影响的评论。

Q3 Dentistry Evidence-based dentistry Pub Date : 2024-06-07 DOI:10.1038/s41432-024-01021-7
Sadie Karia, Lucy Tiplady
{"title":"咬合不正反咬一口:关于咬合不正对口腔摄食影响的评论。","authors":"Sadie Karia, Lucy Tiplady","doi":"10.1038/s41432-024-01021-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted. PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched. Journal articles published between January 2007 and January 2023 were identified. Studies that assessed malocclusion indices and oral function were included. Non-English articles and irrelevant studies were excluded. A total of 480 articles were identified. Following exclusion, 29 articles were included in the systematic review. Data was compiled using Microsoft Excel. Information from each article was extracted including study design, evaluation criteria of malocclusion and oral function, and findings. Studies were assessed using the STROBE GRADE approach. The results were compiled in a brief narrative review investigating the type and strength of the association between malocclusion and ingestion. Malocclusion was recorded using Index of Treatment Need, Dental Aesthetic Index, Goslon Yardstick Index, Index of Complexity Outcomes and Need, Peer Assessment Rating, Angle’s classification, Specific Severity Score, dental inter-arch relation and cephalometric analysis. Ingestion was measured by bite force, electromyography, mixing ability index, bolus granulometric analysis, video analysis of kinetic parameters during mastication, and subjective questionnaires. Of the 29 articles identified, 20 demonstrated a negative impact of malocclusion on oral ingestion, highlighting impaired masticatory efficiency, bite force and subjective difficulties. Eight studies found no significant association. One study, which used two questionnaires, found a significant relationship between eating and malocclusion using one questionnaire but not the other. Limitations in current research methodologies were identified, particularly the heterogeneity in assessment tools. The indicators used to assess ingestion and malocclusion are flawed, with questionable reliability. No study was able to identify which features or severity of malocclusion impact ingestion. The relationship between ingestion and malocclusion could not be quantified and the need for longitudinal and case report studies was deemed essential to establish causality. This review underscores the importance of considering how malocclusion impacts function in orthodontic treatment planning. Future research should focus on standardised assessment methods for measuring malocclusion and oral ingestion to establish the nature of the relationship between the two. This will ultimately guide orthodontic intervention aiming to enhance oral function.","PeriodicalId":12234,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based dentistry","volume":"25 2","pages":"108-109"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bad bites bite back: a commentary on the impact of malocclusion on oral ingestion\",\"authors\":\"Sadie Karia, Lucy Tiplady\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41432-024-01021-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted. PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched. Journal articles published between January 2007 and January 2023 were identified. Studies that assessed malocclusion indices and oral function were included. Non-English articles and irrelevant studies were excluded. A total of 480 articles were identified. Following exclusion, 29 articles were included in the systematic review. Data was compiled using Microsoft Excel. Information from each article was extracted including study design, evaluation criteria of malocclusion and oral function, and findings. Studies were assessed using the STROBE GRADE approach. The results were compiled in a brief narrative review investigating the type and strength of the association between malocclusion and ingestion. Malocclusion was recorded using Index of Treatment Need, Dental Aesthetic Index, Goslon Yardstick Index, Index of Complexity Outcomes and Need, Peer Assessment Rating, Angle’s classification, Specific Severity Score, dental inter-arch relation and cephalometric analysis. Ingestion was measured by bite force, electromyography, mixing ability index, bolus granulometric analysis, video analysis of kinetic parameters during mastication, and subjective questionnaires. Of the 29 articles identified, 20 demonstrated a negative impact of malocclusion on oral ingestion, highlighting impaired masticatory efficiency, bite force and subjective difficulties. Eight studies found no significant association. One study, which used two questionnaires, found a significant relationship between eating and malocclusion using one questionnaire but not the other. Limitations in current research methodologies were identified, particularly the heterogeneity in assessment tools. The indicators used to assess ingestion and malocclusion are flawed, with questionable reliability. No study was able to identify which features or severity of malocclusion impact ingestion. The relationship between ingestion and malocclusion could not be quantified and the need for longitudinal and case report studies was deemed essential to establish causality. This review underscores the importance of considering how malocclusion impacts function in orthodontic treatment planning. Future research should focus on standardised assessment methods for measuring malocclusion and oral ingestion to establish the nature of the relationship between the two. This will ultimately guide orthodontic intervention aiming to enhance oral function.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence-based dentistry\",\"volume\":\"25 2\",\"pages\":\"108-109\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence-based dentistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41432-024-01021-7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based dentistry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41432-024-01021-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

数据来源:按照系统综述和元分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南进行了系统综述。检索了 PubMed 和 Cochrane 数据库:确定了 2007 年 1 月至 2023 年 1 月期间发表的期刊文章。纳入了评估错合畸形指数和口腔功能的研究。非英语文章和无关研究被排除在外。共确定了 480 篇文章。数据提取与综合:使用 Microsoft Excel 汇编数据。从每篇文章中提取的信息包括研究设计、错颌畸形和口腔功能的评估标准以及研究结果。研究采用 STROBE GRADE 方法进行评估。研究结果汇编成一篇简短的叙述性综述,调查错颌畸形与摄食之间关联的类型和强度:使用治疗需求指数、牙齿美学指数、戈斯龙尺度指数、复杂性结果和需求指数、同行评估评级、角度分类、特定严重程度评分、牙列间关系和头颅测量分析记录错颌畸形情况。通过咬合力、肌电图、混合能力指数、栓剂粒度分析、咀嚼时运动参数的视频分析以及主观问卷调查来测量摄食情况。在已确定的 29 篇文章中,有 20 篇表明错颌畸形对口腔摄食有负面影响,突出表现为咀嚼效率、咬合力和主观困难受损。有八项研究没有发现明显的关联。有一项研究使用了两份问卷,其中一份问卷发现进食与错颌畸形有显著关系,而另一份问卷则没有:讨论:发现了当前研究方法的局限性,特别是评估工具的异质性。用于评估进食和错颌畸形的指标存在缺陷,可靠性值得怀疑。没有一项研究能够确定错颌畸形的哪些特征或严重程度会影响摄食。摄食与错颌畸形之间的关系无法量化,因此需要进行纵向研究和病例报告研究,以确定因果关系:本综述强调了在正畸治疗计划中考虑错颌如何影响功能的重要性。未来的研究应重点关注测量错颌畸形和口腔摄食的标准化评估方法,以确定两者之间关系的性质。这将最终指导旨在增强口腔功能的正畸干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Bad bites bite back: a commentary on the impact of malocclusion on oral ingestion
A systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was conducted. PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched. Journal articles published between January 2007 and January 2023 were identified. Studies that assessed malocclusion indices and oral function were included. Non-English articles and irrelevant studies were excluded. A total of 480 articles were identified. Following exclusion, 29 articles were included in the systematic review. Data was compiled using Microsoft Excel. Information from each article was extracted including study design, evaluation criteria of malocclusion and oral function, and findings. Studies were assessed using the STROBE GRADE approach. The results were compiled in a brief narrative review investigating the type and strength of the association between malocclusion and ingestion. Malocclusion was recorded using Index of Treatment Need, Dental Aesthetic Index, Goslon Yardstick Index, Index of Complexity Outcomes and Need, Peer Assessment Rating, Angle’s classification, Specific Severity Score, dental inter-arch relation and cephalometric analysis. Ingestion was measured by bite force, electromyography, mixing ability index, bolus granulometric analysis, video analysis of kinetic parameters during mastication, and subjective questionnaires. Of the 29 articles identified, 20 demonstrated a negative impact of malocclusion on oral ingestion, highlighting impaired masticatory efficiency, bite force and subjective difficulties. Eight studies found no significant association. One study, which used two questionnaires, found a significant relationship between eating and malocclusion using one questionnaire but not the other. Limitations in current research methodologies were identified, particularly the heterogeneity in assessment tools. The indicators used to assess ingestion and malocclusion are flawed, with questionable reliability. No study was able to identify which features or severity of malocclusion impact ingestion. The relationship between ingestion and malocclusion could not be quantified and the need for longitudinal and case report studies was deemed essential to establish causality. This review underscores the importance of considering how malocclusion impacts function in orthodontic treatment planning. Future research should focus on standardised assessment methods for measuring malocclusion and oral ingestion to establish the nature of the relationship between the two. This will ultimately guide orthodontic intervention aiming to enhance oral function.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Evidence-based dentistry
Evidence-based dentistry Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
期刊介绍: Evidence-Based Dentistry delivers the best available evidence on the latest developments in oral health. We evaluate the evidence and provide guidance concerning the value of the author''s conclusions. We keep dentistry up to date with new approaches, exploring a wide range of the latest developments through an accessible expert commentary. Original papers and relevant publications are condensed into digestible summaries, drawing attention to the current methods and findings. We are a central resource for the most cutting edge and relevant issues concerning the evidence-based approach in dentistry today. Evidence-Based Dentistry is published by Springer Nature on behalf of the British Dental Association.
期刊最新文献
Effectiveness of school-based oral health education interventions on oral health status and oral hygiene behaviors among schoolchildren: an umbrella review. Does adopting a healthy diet improve periodontal parameters in patients susceptible to periodontal disease? A systematic review. Effectiveness of 'video-based interventions' of toothbrushing over other interventions on improvement of oral hygiene in children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD): a systematic review and meta-analysis. How can we remove erroneous penicillin allergy labels? Auxillary aids for pain and anxiety reduction during dental local anesthesia in pediatric patients: a systematic review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1