4.3 Article

Masticatory muscle sleep background electromyographic activity is elevated in myofascial temporomandibular disorder patients

期刊

JOURNAL OF ORAL REHABILITATION
卷 40, 期 12, 页码 883-891

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/joor.12112

关键词

bruxism; EMG; muscle tone; myofascial pain; polysomnography; sleep; sleep bruxism; temporomandibular disorders; TMD

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA [R01 DE018569]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite theoretical speculation and strong clinical belief, recent research using laboratory polysomnographic (PSG) recording has provided new evidence that frequency of sleep bruxism (SB) masseter muscle events, including grinding or clenching of the teeth during sleep, is not increased for women with chronic myofascial temporomandibular disorder (TMD). The current case-control study compares a large sample of women suffering from chronic myofascial TMD (n=124) with a demographically matched control group without TMD (n=46) on sleep background electromyography (EMG) during a laboratory PSG study. Background EMG activity was measured as EMG root mean square (RMS) from the right masseter muscle after lights out. Sleep background EMG activity was defined as EMG RMS remaining after activity attributable to SB, other orofacial activity, other oromotor activity and movement artefacts were removed. Results indicated that median background EMG during these non-SB event periods was significantly higher (P<001) for women with myofascial TMD (median=331V and mean=498V) than for control women (median=283V and mean=388V) with median activity in 72% of cases exceeding control activity. Moreover, for TMD cases, background EMG was positively associated and SB event-related EMG was negatively associated with pain intensity ratings (0-10 numerical scale) on post-sleep waking. These data provide the foundation for a new focus on small, but persistent, elevations in sleep EMG activity over the course of the night as a mechanism of pain induction or maintenance.

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