Does altered mandibular position and dental occlusion influence upper cervical movement: A cross-sectional study in asymptomatic people

Objective: Gross mandibular position and masticatory muscle activity have been shown to influence cervical muscles electromyographic activity. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of three different mandible positions including conscious occlusion, tongue tip against the anteri...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Grondin, F., Hall, Toby, von Piekartz, H.
Format: Journal Article
Published: Churchill Livingstone 2017
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/7569
_version_ 1848745406421270528
author Grondin, F.
Hall, Toby
von Piekartz, H.
author_facet Grondin, F.
Hall, Toby
von Piekartz, H.
author_sort Grondin, F.
building Curtin Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
description Objective: Gross mandibular position and masticatory muscle activity have been shown to influence cervical muscles electromyographic activity. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of three different mandible positions including conscious occlusion, tongue tip against the anterior hard palate (Palate tongue position) and natural resting position (Rest), on sagittal plane cervical spine range of motion (ROM) as well as the flexion-rotation test (FRT) in asymptomatic subjects. Materials and methods: An experienced single blinded examiner evaluated ROM using an Iphone in 22 subjects (7 females; mean age of 29.91years, SD 5.44). Results: Intra-rater reliability for range recorded was good for the FRT with ICC (intraclass correlation) 0.95 (95% CI: 0.88–0.98) and good for sagittal plane cervical ROM with ICC 0.90 (95% CI: 0.77–0.96). A repeated measures ANOVA determined that mean ROM recorded during the FRT differed significantly between assessment points (F(1.99, 41.83) = 19.88, P < 0.001). Bonferroni Post hoc tests revealed that both conscious Occlusion and Palate tongue position elicited a significant large reduction in ROM recorded during the FRT from baseline (p < 0.01). Despite this, one activation strategy did not influence ROM more than the other. An additional repeated measures ANOVA determined that mean sagittal cervical ROM did not significantly vary between assessment points (F(2, 42) = 8.18, P = 0.08). Conclusion: This current study provided further evidence for the influence of the temporomandibular region on upper cervical ROM. Results suggest that clinicians should focus on the natural mandible rest position when evaluating upper cervical mobility.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T06:16:51Z
format Journal Article
id curtin-20.500.11937-7569
institution Curtin University Malaysia
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T06:16:51Z
publishDate 2017
publisher Churchill Livingstone
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling curtin-20.500.11937-75692017-09-13T15:38:03Z Does altered mandibular position and dental occlusion influence upper cervical movement: A cross-sectional study in asymptomatic people Grondin, F. Hall, Toby von Piekartz, H. Objective: Gross mandibular position and masticatory muscle activity have been shown to influence cervical muscles electromyographic activity. The purpose of this study was to investigate the influence of three different mandible positions including conscious occlusion, tongue tip against the anterior hard palate (Palate tongue position) and natural resting position (Rest), on sagittal plane cervical spine range of motion (ROM) as well as the flexion-rotation test (FRT) in asymptomatic subjects. Materials and methods: An experienced single blinded examiner evaluated ROM using an Iphone in 22 subjects (7 females; mean age of 29.91years, SD 5.44). Results: Intra-rater reliability for range recorded was good for the FRT with ICC (intraclass correlation) 0.95 (95% CI: 0.88–0.98) and good for sagittal plane cervical ROM with ICC 0.90 (95% CI: 0.77–0.96). A repeated measures ANOVA determined that mean ROM recorded during the FRT differed significantly between assessment points (F(1.99, 41.83) = 19.88, P < 0.001). Bonferroni Post hoc tests revealed that both conscious Occlusion and Palate tongue position elicited a significant large reduction in ROM recorded during the FRT from baseline (p < 0.01). Despite this, one activation strategy did not influence ROM more than the other. An additional repeated measures ANOVA determined that mean sagittal cervical ROM did not significantly vary between assessment points (F(2, 42) = 8.18, P = 0.08). Conclusion: This current study provided further evidence for the influence of the temporomandibular region on upper cervical ROM. Results suggest that clinicians should focus on the natural mandible rest position when evaluating upper cervical mobility. 2017 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/7569 10.1016/j.math.2016.06.007 Churchill Livingstone restricted
spellingShingle Grondin, F.
Hall, Toby
von Piekartz, H.
Does altered mandibular position and dental occlusion influence upper cervical movement: A cross-sectional study in asymptomatic people
title Does altered mandibular position and dental occlusion influence upper cervical movement: A cross-sectional study in asymptomatic people
title_full Does altered mandibular position and dental occlusion influence upper cervical movement: A cross-sectional study in asymptomatic people
title_fullStr Does altered mandibular position and dental occlusion influence upper cervical movement: A cross-sectional study in asymptomatic people
title_full_unstemmed Does altered mandibular position and dental occlusion influence upper cervical movement: A cross-sectional study in asymptomatic people
title_short Does altered mandibular position and dental occlusion influence upper cervical movement: A cross-sectional study in asymptomatic people
title_sort does altered mandibular position and dental occlusion influence upper cervical movement: a cross-sectional study in asymptomatic people
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/7569