No abstract

TMR, female sex, and older age were risk factors independently associated with TMD. The results also suggest that patients' awareness of potential risk factors for TMD should be taken into account on an individual basis.

The Portuguese translation of the OBC exhibits cross-cultural equivalence for use in Portugal, and the instrument performs with acceptable psychometric properties. The validity of the parafunction construct requires additional research in both Portuguese and other languages.

Background Many different types of oral overuse behaviours occur frequently in adult populations with painful temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). Less is known regarding these behaviours and their associations with TMDs in university students. Objectives Test the association between frequency of different oral overuse behaviours evaluated by the Oral Behaviour Checklist (OBC) and the severity of painful TMDs. Methods In this cross‐sectional study, 1381 students from 19 universities in the Oporto District, Portugal, completed the Research Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (RDC/TMD) Personal History Questionnaire and the OBC, and they received an RDC/TMD clinical examination. The OBC sum score (ranging from 0 to 84 points) was classified as normal (0 ≤ 16 points), low overuse (17 ≤ 24) or high overuse (≥25). Painful TMD subtypes (myalgia, arthralgia or combined) were identified. Associations were tested using multivariable binary logistic regression models (α = .05), adjusted for age and sex, and referencing the normal parafunction group. Results University students with high overuse were more likely to have a painful TMD: myalgia (OR = 1.9, 95% CL: 1.3–3.0); arthralgia (OR = 2.2; 95% CL: 1.4–3.4), combined (OR = 5.0; 95% CL: 3.1–8.1). Students with low overuse were more likely to have only the combined painful TMD (OR = 2.4; 95% CL: 1.4–4.0) but not the individual painful disorders. Of the 21 different behaviours, 13 were reported at least 50% of the time. Conclusions In this university student sample, oral overuse behaviours are widespread, and their overall extent exhibited a dose‐response relationship with respect to severity of painful TMDs based on pain and chronicity. Only some behaviours were independently associated with painful TMDs, suggesting the value of further OBC instrument development.

Aim: Compare clinical performance and success/retention rates of two multi-mode (MM) adhesives, applied in self-etch (SE) or etch-and-rinse (ER) modes, with SE-all-in-one adhesive (SE/SE with enamel etching) in NCCL restorations at one-year follow-up. Material and methods: Prospective, double-blind RCT approved by the University Fernando Pessoa and the National-Clinical-Research-Ethics Committees (CEIC-20150305), ClinicalTrials.gov registered (NCT02698371), in 38 participants with 210 restorations (AdmiraFusion V R ) randomly allocated to six groups (Adhesives_Adhesion mode), each with 35 restorations: G1-ControlRestorations evaluated at baseline and one-year by three calibrated examiners (ICC !0.952) using FDI criteria and statistical analysis with nonparametric tests (alpha ¼ 0.05). Results: At one-year recall 36 participants, 199 restorations were available for examination; five (2.5%) restorations (G1 n ¼ 2; G2, G3, G4 n ¼ 1) were lost due to retention (p > .05); G1 showed less satisfying marginal adaptation (p < .05) than G2 and MM adhesives groups, particularly G6. Overall success rates (p > .05) were: 93.9% (G1), 97.0% (G2; G3; G4) and 100.0% (G5; G6). Conclusions: MM adhesives (Futurabond V R U and Adhese V R Universal) showed similar and acceptable performance/success rates but also better clinical outputs than the SE-all-in-one adhesive (Futurabond V R DC), particularly in SE mode. Success and retention rates were similar and not dependent on materials or adhesion modes. ARTICLE HISTORY