Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective To analyse the relationship between bruxism and musculoskeletal parameters of the cervical and mandibular regions in children and adolescents.Methods A comparative cross-sectional study was performed with subjects from 6 to 16 years. Subjects were divided into bruxism (any type) and control groups. Descriptive data, jaw opening, upper cervical spine mobility, myofascial trigger points (MTPs) and muscular tension of the jaw and neck muscles, the activation pattern of neck flexors and activation of Deep Neck Flexors (DNF) were registered and compared between groups.Results 121 subjects participated in the study. Children and adolescents reporting bruxism showed a significant reduction in the contraction of DNF (p = .034) and the activation ratio (p = .035) compared to controls. Besides, MTPs of both masseters were significantly more frequent in subjects reporting bruxism (p = .001–0.002). No differences were found in other measurements.Conclusion Bruxism is related to a weaker contraction of DNF, a lower activation ratio, and a higher number of MTPs in masseters.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cardiel-Sánchez et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: