Mechanobehaviour in dolichofacial and brachyfacial adolescents

Jeffrey Nickel, A. L. Weber, P. Covington Riddle, Y. Liu, H. Liu, Laura Iwasaki

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: To test whether mechanobehaviour (temporomandibular joint (TMJ) loads, jaw muscle use) was different between facial types and correlated with ramus height (Condylion-Gonion, mm). Setting and Sample Population: University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) Orthodontic Clinic. Ten dolichofacial and ten brachyfacial adolescents (Sella-Nasion–Gonion-Gnathion (SN-GoGn) angles ≥37° and ≤27°, respectively) consented to participate. Materials and Methods: Numerical models calculated TMJ loads for a range of static biting based on subjects’ three-dimensional anatomy. Subjects were trained to record jaw muscle electromyography (EMG) over 2 days and 2 nights in their natural environments. Laboratory EMG/bite-force calibrations determined subject-specific EMG for 20 N bite-force (T20Nave). Jaw muscle use via duty factors (DF=muscle activity duration/total recording time, %) was determined from day and night recordings for muscle-specific thresholds from ≥5% to ≥80%T20Nave. ANOVA and Tukey's HSD post hoc tests assessed for group differences in mechanobehaviour (TMJ loads, DFs). Regression modelling correlated subjects’ normalized TMJ loads, DFs and ramus height. Results: Dolichofacial compared to brachyfacial subjects produced significantly higher (P<.05) TMJ loads, where ipsilateral loads were ≥20% larger for some biting angles, but had significantly less (all P<.05) masseter (day, night) and temporalis (night) DFs. Regression analysis showed a significant relationship amongst normalized TMJ loads, masseter DF and ramus height (R2=.49). Conclusions: Mechanobehaviour showed significant differences between facial types and was correlated with ramus height.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)139-144
Number of pages6
JournalOrthodontics and Craniofacial Research
Volume20
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Temporomandibular Joint
Electromyography
Muscles
Jaw
Bite Force
Orthodontics
Calibration
Anatomy
Analysis of Variance
Regression Analysis
Population

Keywords

  • behaviour
  • facial type
  • mandible
  • mechanics
  • temporomandibular joint

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthodontics
  • Surgery
  • Oral Surgery
  • Otorhinolaryngology

Cite this

Mechanobehaviour in dolichofacial and brachyfacial adolescents. / Nickel, Jeffrey; Weber, A. L.; Covington Riddle, P.; Liu, Y.; Liu, H.; Iwasaki, Laura.

In: Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research, Vol. 20, 01.06.2017, p. 139-144.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Nickel, Jeffrey ; Weber, A. L. ; Covington Riddle, P. ; Liu, Y. ; Liu, H. ; Iwasaki, Laura. / Mechanobehaviour in dolichofacial and brachyfacial adolescents. In: Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research. 2017 ; Vol. 20. pp. 139-144.
@article{e1983c479331435bac1c9e2987928af4,
title = "Mechanobehaviour in dolichofacial and brachyfacial adolescents",
abstract = "Objectives: To test whether mechanobehaviour (temporomandibular joint (TMJ) loads, jaw muscle use) was different between facial types and correlated with ramus height (Condylion-Gonion, mm). Setting and Sample Population: University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) Orthodontic Clinic. Ten dolichofacial and ten brachyfacial adolescents (Sella-Nasion–Gonion-Gnathion (SN-GoGn) angles ≥37° and ≤27°, respectively) consented to participate. Materials and Methods: Numerical models calculated TMJ loads for a range of static biting based on subjects’ three-dimensional anatomy. Subjects were trained to record jaw muscle electromyography (EMG) over 2 days and 2 nights in their natural environments. Laboratory EMG/bite-force calibrations determined subject-specific EMG for 20 N bite-force (T20Nave). Jaw muscle use via duty factors (DF=muscle activity duration/total recording time, {\%}) was determined from day and night recordings for muscle-specific thresholds from ≥5{\%} to ≥80{\%}T20Nave. ANOVA and Tukey's HSD post hoc tests assessed for group differences in mechanobehaviour (TMJ loads, DFs). Regression modelling correlated subjects’ normalized TMJ loads, DFs and ramus height. Results: Dolichofacial compared to brachyfacial subjects produced significantly higher (P<.05) TMJ loads, where ipsilateral loads were ≥20{\%} larger for some biting angles, but had significantly less (all P<.05) masseter (day, night) and temporalis (night) DFs. Regression analysis showed a significant relationship amongst normalized TMJ loads, masseter DF and ramus height (R2=.49). Conclusions: Mechanobehaviour showed significant differences between facial types and was correlated with ramus height.",
keywords = "behaviour, facial type, mandible, mechanics, temporomandibular joint",
author = "Jeffrey Nickel and Weber, {A. L.} and {Covington Riddle}, P. and Y. Liu and H. Liu and Laura Iwasaki",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/ocr.12148",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "139--144",
journal = "Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research",
issn = "1601-6335",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mechanobehaviour in dolichofacial and brachyfacial adolescents

AU - Nickel, Jeffrey

AU - Weber, A. L.

AU - Covington Riddle, P.

AU - Liu, Y.

AU - Liu, H.

AU - Iwasaki, Laura

PY - 2017/6/1

Y1 - 2017/6/1

N2 - Objectives: To test whether mechanobehaviour (temporomandibular joint (TMJ) loads, jaw muscle use) was different between facial types and correlated with ramus height (Condylion-Gonion, mm). Setting and Sample Population: University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) Orthodontic Clinic. Ten dolichofacial and ten brachyfacial adolescents (Sella-Nasion–Gonion-Gnathion (SN-GoGn) angles ≥37° and ≤27°, respectively) consented to participate. Materials and Methods: Numerical models calculated TMJ loads for a range of static biting based on subjects’ three-dimensional anatomy. Subjects were trained to record jaw muscle electromyography (EMG) over 2 days and 2 nights in their natural environments. Laboratory EMG/bite-force calibrations determined subject-specific EMG for 20 N bite-force (T20Nave). Jaw muscle use via duty factors (DF=muscle activity duration/total recording time, %) was determined from day and night recordings for muscle-specific thresholds from ≥5% to ≥80%T20Nave. ANOVA and Tukey's HSD post hoc tests assessed for group differences in mechanobehaviour (TMJ loads, DFs). Regression modelling correlated subjects’ normalized TMJ loads, DFs and ramus height. Results: Dolichofacial compared to brachyfacial subjects produced significantly higher (P<.05) TMJ loads, where ipsilateral loads were ≥20% larger for some biting angles, but had significantly less (all P<.05) masseter (day, night) and temporalis (night) DFs. Regression analysis showed a significant relationship amongst normalized TMJ loads, masseter DF and ramus height (R2=.49). Conclusions: Mechanobehaviour showed significant differences between facial types and was correlated with ramus height.

AB - Objectives: To test whether mechanobehaviour (temporomandibular joint (TMJ) loads, jaw muscle use) was different between facial types and correlated with ramus height (Condylion-Gonion, mm). Setting and Sample Population: University of Missouri-Kansas City (UMKC) Orthodontic Clinic. Ten dolichofacial and ten brachyfacial adolescents (Sella-Nasion–Gonion-Gnathion (SN-GoGn) angles ≥37° and ≤27°, respectively) consented to participate. Materials and Methods: Numerical models calculated TMJ loads for a range of static biting based on subjects’ three-dimensional anatomy. Subjects were trained to record jaw muscle electromyography (EMG) over 2 days and 2 nights in their natural environments. Laboratory EMG/bite-force calibrations determined subject-specific EMG for 20 N bite-force (T20Nave). Jaw muscle use via duty factors (DF=muscle activity duration/total recording time, %) was determined from day and night recordings for muscle-specific thresholds from ≥5% to ≥80%T20Nave. ANOVA and Tukey's HSD post hoc tests assessed for group differences in mechanobehaviour (TMJ loads, DFs). Regression modelling correlated subjects’ normalized TMJ loads, DFs and ramus height. Results: Dolichofacial compared to brachyfacial subjects produced significantly higher (P<.05) TMJ loads, where ipsilateral loads were ≥20% larger for some biting angles, but had significantly less (all P<.05) masseter (day, night) and temporalis (night) DFs. Regression analysis showed a significant relationship amongst normalized TMJ loads, masseter DF and ramus height (R2=.49). Conclusions: Mechanobehaviour showed significant differences between facial types and was correlated with ramus height.

KW - behaviour

KW - facial type

KW - mandible

KW - mechanics

KW - temporomandibular joint

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85021079296&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85021079296&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/ocr.12148

DO - 10.1111/ocr.12148

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 139

EP - 144

JO - Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research

JF - Orthodontics and Craniofacial Research

SN - 1601-6335

ER -