4.3 Article

Gastric emptying rate in subjects with malocclusion examined by [13C] breath test

期刊

JOURNAL OF ORAL REHABILITATION
卷 40, 期 8, 页码 574-581

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/joor.12073

关键词

malocclusion; masticatory function; gastric emptying; digestion; colour-changeable chewing gum; questionnaires

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology in Japan [2359 3023]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Masticatory function is significantly lower in individuals with malocclusion than in those with normal occlusion. Although several studies suggest that masticatory function influences gastrointestinal digestive function, the relationship between malocclusion and gastrointestinal symptoms has not been studied extensively. We hypothesised that insufficient masticatory function would increase the functional burden of the stomach and have some influence on the gastrointestinal system. The purpose of this study was to investigate masticatory function and gastric emptying rate in subjects with malocclusion. Eleven healthy dentate female volunteers and eleven female patients with malocclusion underwent a C-13-acetate breath test with a liquid meal. Maximum (CO2)-C-13 exhalation time (T-max) was compared statistically between both groups. Masticatory function was assessed by colour-changeable chewing gum. In addition, the frequency scale for the symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (FSSG) and questionnaires on food intake were given to both groups. The mean T-max of the malocclusion group was significantly longer than that of the normal occlusion group (P = 0.007). Masticatory performance, measured by colour-changeable gum and questionnaires, was significantly lower in the malocclusion group than in the normal occlusion group (P = 0.023, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference in the FSSG results between the two groups (P = 0.262). This study suggested that there was a correlation between malocclusion and gastric emptying function in women.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据