4.3 Article

Interrelationships between distinct circadian manifestations of possible bruxism, perceived stress, chronotype and social jetlag in a population of undergraduate students

期刊

CHRONOBIOLOGY INTERNATIONAL
卷 36, 期 11, 页码 1558-1569

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/07420528.2019.1660356

关键词

Bruxism; chronotype; psychological stress; circadian rhythm; sleep disorder; students

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the recently hypothesized association between distinct circadian manifestations of possible bruxism in subjects with different chronotype profiles, social jetlag and levels of perceived stress. A cross-sectional study was performed by surveying dental students' of Lithuanian University of Health Sciences. A survey instrument was designed and pilot tested for reliability and validity prior to full-scale administration. The instrument consisted of four sections: socio-demographic questions, bruxism-related items, the Perceived Stress Scale and the Munich ChronoType Questionnaire. The study included 228 students (82.5% females; mean age 22.67 +/- 2.27). Awake grinding was significantly associated with later chronotype values (p = 0,039). Despite the lack of significance, binary regression models demonstrated that students with later chronotypes report higher rates of possible bruxism, especially as far as awake grinding (p = .170; OR = 1.89) and sleep grinding (p = .140; OR = 1.60) are concerned. There were no significant associations between perceived stress, social jetlag and bruxism. The scores of perceived stress did not correlate with chronotype values, although a high positive correlation was found between chronotype and social jetlag (r = 0.516, p = .000). It can be concluded that later chronotypes increase the odds for self-reported bruxism, and are significantly associated with higher rates of awake grinding and social jetlag. No interrelationships were found between perceived stress, possible bruxism and social jetlag.

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