Human bite force discrimination using specific maxillary and mandibular teeth

• Published in: Journal of oral rehabilitation Vol. 16; no. 6; p. 529
• Main Authors: Coffey, J P, Williams, W N, Turner, G E, Mahan, P E, Lapointe, L L, Cornell, C E
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England 01-11-1989
• Subjects: Adult; Analysis of Variance; Bite Force; Dental Occlusion; Dental Stress Analysis - instrumentation; Dental Stress Analysis - methods; Discrimination (Psychology); Female; Humans; Male; Mechanoreceptors - physiology; Periodontal Ligament - physiology; Reference Values; Sensory Thresholds
• ISSN: 0305-182X
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.1989.tb01374.x

The purpose of this study was to determine whether performance differences existed in subjects' self-generated bite force discrimination ability using maxillary and mandibular central incisors, canines, premolars and first molars. Two separate studies were conducted: (i) to assess whether performance differences existed in subjects' bite force discrimination ability using central incisors and premolars; (ii) to compare subjects' performance on bite force discrimination using central incisors, canines and first molars. Assessment of bite force was measured using a specially designed strain gauge scale allowing subjects to visually monitor when their biting force equalled a preset resistance. Resistance forces of 500, 1000 and 3000 g were selected as standards. Subjects were presented with a series of paired resistance settings, one at a time, the first of each pair being the standard and the second being the comparator setting of a predetermined amount. This paired-comparisons procedure was continued until the subjects' difference limen (DL) value (the threshold of discrimination between two forces) could be established. The first study revealed no significant (P greater than 0.05) overall difference in subjects' bite force discrimination ability relative to specific teeth. In contrast, in the second study a significant difference (P less than 0.05) was identified in subjects' performance relative to specific teeth; subjects' performed better using central incisors compared to first molars. In both studies, subjects' performance was significantly better (P less than 0.05) using the 500 g standard compared to the 3000 g standard in the first study, and compared to the 1000 g standard in the second study. No significant differences (P greater than 0.05) were observed between the performance of males and females in either study.