Maximal Bite Force Measured via Digital Bite Force Transducer in Subjects with or without Dental Implants—A Pilot Study

Abstract

The aims of the current study were as following: (1) to evaluate the maximal bite forces in patients with dental implants versus patients without dental implants, as measured by a digital bite force transducer (GM10); (2) to evaluate the influences of sex, age, and sleep/awake bruxism on the maximal bite forces of the two groups. Forty patients recruited to the study were divided into two groups: test group (“implant”) if they had one or more posterior restored implants and control group (“no-implant”) without the presence of posterior dental implants. A digital bite fork (GM10) was used to measure the bite forces from three posterior occluding pairs in all participants. Differences in the mean values between the test and control groups and between different sexes were evaluated using one-way and two-way ANOVA tests. A cross-tabulation analysis was conducted to identify a trend line between the groups. There was no significant difference in the maximal bite force between the test and control groups (p = 0.422), but the cross-tabulation analysis revealed a clear trend of a stronger representation of the “no-implant” group at higher occlusal forces. A significant difference was detected between the maximal biting forces of male and female subjects (p = 0.030 in the implant group, p = 0.010 in the no-implant group), regardless of the experimental group. The presence of bruxism and clenching did not influence the bite force values (p = 0.953), and a significant difference was not found between the age groups (p = 0.393). Within the limitations of this study, it may be assumed that there was no significant difference between the maximal bite forces between patients with and without dental implants but that there was a trend line implicating a stronger representation of the “no-implant” group at higher forces. In addition, the results revealed a significant sex-related difference in the maximal occlusal force. Further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted.

Biomechanical behavior of posterior metal-free cantilever fixed dental prostheses: effect of material and retainer design

“…The mean unilateral bite force in the premolar area is 70% lower than the molar region, with an average of 210-420 N [42]. In another study [51], the mean value of the maximum bite force is around 353 N in men, while in women it is 218 N. In one study [50] discussing the effect of clenching intensity on the biting force in the premolar region, the results showed values from 450 to 660 N. According to our results, these designs cannot be used in case of clenching and bruxism. Occlusal forces rarely reach 45 N during normal chewing, equivalent to the mean of molar bite force [9].…”

“…According to the literature, the intraoral bite forces are in the range of 216-847 N [9,50]. The mean unilateral bite force in the premolar area is 70% lower than the molar region, with an average of 210-420 N [42].…”

Performance of Oral Cavity Sensors: A Systematic Review

“…The error values are not directly comparable because of the variable sensor designs, testing conditions, and error calculations used. Five studies used intraclass correlation coefficient to measure the repeatability of bite force measurements using force sensing resistors (ICC = 0.93) [ 46 ], a miniature load cell (ICC = 0.719) [ 112 ], or bite forks (ICC = 0.3–0.64 for inter-observer reliability and ICC = 0.63–0.96 for intra-observer reliability) [ 47 , 48 , 109 ]. One study used Kappa analysis to calculate inter-device reliability (Kappa = 0.8132 ± 0.0544 and 0.8303 ± 0.0538) [ 109 ].…”

Fracture Resistance of CAD/CAM Implant-Supported 3Y-TZP-Zirconia Cantilevers: An In Vitro Study

“…The measurement of BF allows us to determine the average BF values of a given population, thus helping us choose the most suitable and resistant materials during prosthetic rehabilitation. Based on Takaki et al’s study, in which they reported a mean BF of 285.01 N for women and 253.99 N for men [ 31 ], and Levartovsky et al’s study, in which they reported an average BF of between 258.5 N and 175.8 N [ 32 ], we used an average BF reference value of 250 N. Taking into account this average BF value and analyzing the results obtained, we can see that all structures with a 6 mm cantilever required a force greater than the average reference value for fracture to occur, unlike structures with a 10 mm cantilever, of which only three structures resisted forces greater than 250 N (one in PT and two in IZT). However, Van Vuuren et al reported an average BF of 430.4 N [ 33 ], and, taking this value into account, we can see that only structures with a 6 mm cantilever can resist this average BF, given that the mean fracture values found in this study were 437.54 N in PT and 447.05 N in IZT.…”