Maximal mouth opening capacity: percentiles for healthy children 4–17 years of age

Abstract

BackgroundA reduced mouth opening capacity may be one of the first clinical signs of pathological changes in the masticatory system. The aim of this retrospective cross-sectional study was to create age related percentiles for unassisted maximal mouth opening capacity (MOC) of healthy children.MethodsAll recordings of MOC as measured at the yearly dental examinations of school children in the city of Zurich, Switzerland, between August 2009 and August 2010 were extracted from the database. The program LMSchartMaker Pro Version 2.43, Huiqi Pan and Tim Cole, Medical Research Council, 1997–2010 was used to calculate age and sex related reference centiles.ResultsRecords from 22′060 dental examinations were found during the study period. In 1286 (5.8%) the maximal interincisal measurement was missing. Another 55 examinations were excluded because of missing data for sex (7), age at examination (11) or because the value was deemed to be pathologically low (37). Thus, a total of 20′719 measurements (10′060 girls, 10′659 boys) were included in the analysis. The median age (range) was 9.9 years (3.3-18.3) for girls and 10.0 years (2.8-18.7) for boys. The mean MOC (range) was 45 mm (25–69) for girls and 45 mm (25–70) for boys. Age related percentiles were created for girls and boys separately, showing the 3rd, 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th, and 97th percentile from 3 through 18 years of age.ConclusionsIn these 20′719 unselected school children MOC increased with age but showed a wide range within children of the same age.

Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) for Clinical and Research Applications: Recommendations of the International RDC/TMD Consortium Network* and Orofacial Pain Special Interest Group†

“…For example, limited mouth opening has been traditionally assessed using less than 40 mm as a “cut-off”; a recent population-based study involving more than 20,000 individuals supports this cutoff. 134 An alternative perspective is to ask patients if they perceive a limitation in their opening independent of this “cutoff.” Ultimately, what the patient believes, feels, and reports is as important as what the clinician is able to observe and measure.…”

Moebius sequence –a multidisciplinary clinical approach

“…c maximal opening capacity: interincisal distance on unassisted mouth opening + VOB. d previous transplantation of a muscle grafted from the thigh to the corners of the mouth to improve facial expression [22, 23, 26]. e Craniofacial values compared to mean values and standard-deviation (SD) in 51 untreated healthy females with normal teeth and occlusion.…”

“…of incisors and first molars with bleeding on probing), and morphological characteristics of the tongue. In addition, the mouth opening capacity (MOC) (i.e., maximal interincisal distance on unassisted mouth opening + VOB) was compared to a reference value (the mean value in 20719 unselected children, 4–17 years) [22], and signs of temporomandibular dysfunction were assessed. The orofacial motor function was tested by The Nordic Orofacial Test- Screening (NOT-S) [23].…”

Clinical Diagnosis of Temporomandibular Joint Arthritis: A Difficult Task

“…Further, the diagnosis of TMJ involvement in most studies was based on radiographic signs; that is, bony changes were already present in these patients and may have contributed to the functional loss. On the other hand, as Koos, et al correctly point out, the wide range of normal values for mouth opening capacity among healthy children already foreshadows the study result that a single measurement of a single patient is unlikely to be a reliable predictor of TMJ pathology 14 .…”