Dental Malocclusion and Body Posture in Young Subjects: A Multiple Regression Study

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:Controversial results have been reported on potential correlations between the stomatognathic system and body posture. We investigated whether malocclusal traits correlate with body posture alterations in young subjects to determine possible clinical applications.METHODS:A total of 122 subjects, including 86 males and 36 females (age range of 10.8–16.3 years), were enrolled. All subjects tested negative for temporomandibular disorders or other conditions affecting the stomatognathic systems, except malocclusion. A dental occlusion assessment included phase of dentition, molar class, overjet, overbite, anterior and posterior crossbite, scissorbite, mandibular crowding and dental midline deviation. In addition, body posture was recorded through static posturography using a vertical force platform. Recordings were performed under two conditions, namely, i) mandibular rest position (RP) and ii) dental intercuspidal position (ICP). Posturographic parameters included the projected sway area and velocity and the antero-posterior and right-left load differences. Multiple regression models were run for both recording conditions to evaluate associations between each malocclusal trait and posturographic parameters.RESULTS:All of the posturographic parameters had large variability and were very similar between the two recording conditions. Moreover, a limited number of weakly significant correlations were observed, mainly for overbite and dentition phase, when using multivariate models.CONCLUSION:Our current findings, particularly with regard to the use of posturography as a diagnostic aid for subjects affected by dental malocclusion, do not support existence of clinically relevant correlations between malocclusal traits and body posture.

Does asymmetry in the stomatognathic system correlate with body posture impairments?: A systematic review

“…Among the 29 articles assessed in full text, 18 were excluded with details summarized in Table 4. The remaining 11 studies [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] were judged eligible for inclusion and are listed in Table 5.…”

“…These studies included 3 experimental and 8 observational studies, classified as follows: 1 RCT with 1.1 years of follow-up 20 , 2 CCTs without follow-up 13,15 , 2 case-control studies without follow-up 18,21 , 1 Cohort study without follow-up 19 and 5 cross-sectional studies. 14,16,17,22,23 All the studies included both females and males.…”

“…14,15,17,23 The age of the subjects was generally similar among studies and between also variable, with some studies including children 20,21 , others including adolescents [14][15][16][17][18][19]22 and the rest studies including young adults. 13,23 Most of the studies were focused on the posterior monolateral crossbite [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] or other occlusal traits such as asymmetrical dental Class. 13,14,19 The only RCT 20 was focused on the body posture effects of the treatment of monolateral crossbite by slow maxillary expansion.…”

“…13,23 Most of the studies were focused on the posterior monolateral crossbite [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22] or other occlusal traits such as asymmetrical dental Class. 13,14,19 The only RCT 20 was focused on the body posture effects of the treatment of monolateral crossbite by slow maxillary expansion. Finally, only one study 23 included subjects with major skeletal asymmetries irrespective of the presence of a crossbite.…”

“…Among the observational studies, recordings were performed under no particular conditions, as standing position 16,17,[21][22][23] or under different mandibular 19 or head 18 positions. The two studies 13,15 classified as CCTs recorded body posture under different mandibular positions with and without cotton rolls between the dental arches.…”