4.6 Article

Synergist coactivation and substitution pattern of the human masseter and temporalis muscles during sustained static contractions

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 120, 期 1, 页码 190-197

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2008.10.004

关键词

Clenching; Masticatory muscles; Bite force; Electromyography; Pain

资金

  1. Department of Oral, Dental and Maxillo-Facial Sciences, University of Naples

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Previous reports indicated that between-muscle substitution of active motor unit pools can be found in a variety of synergist muscles, including shoulder and leg muscles, but little information is available for the masticatory muscles. We hypothesized that, during a prolonged clenching effort performed at low- to moderate-bite force levels, a Substitution pattern of activity can be found also in the masseter and anterior temporal Muscles. Methods: Ten healthy volunteers were recruited and were asked to clench unilaterally on a force transducer for 10 min at 10%, 15%, and 20% of the maximum bite force. During each session, bite force, perceived muscle pain and electromyographic activity were continuously assessed. Data analyses were performed by means of cross-correlation and periodogram analyses. Results: During sustained static contractions, different contraction patterns of jaw elevator muscles could be identified. These included a coactivation pattern, a substitution pattern, and several intermediate situations between coactivation and substitution. Conclusions: The findings support the concept that the masticatory muscles are functionally heterogeneous and provide evidence that the neuromuscular strategies used by the masticatory system to perform sustained static contractions differ between individuals. Significance: Individual neuromuscular strategies might play a role in the development of masticatory muscle pain conditions. (C) 2008 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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