Standardised Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism.

OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to present and describe the Standardised Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB), an instrument that was developed to provide a multidimensional evaluation of bruxism status, comorbid conditions, aetiology and consequences. METHODS: The rationale for creating the tool and the road map that led to the selection of items included in the STAB has been discussed in previous publications. RESULTS: The tool consists of two axes, specifically dedicated to the evaluation of bruxism status and consequences (Axis A) and of bruxism risk and etiological factors and comorbid conditions (Axis B). The tool includes 14 domains, accounting for a total of 66 items. Axis A includes the self-reported information on bruxism status and possible consequences (subject-based report) together with the clinical (examiner report) and instrumental (technology report) assessment. The Subject-Based Assessment (SBA) includes domains on Sleep Bruxism (A1), Awake Bruxism (A2) and Patient's Complaints (A3), with information based on patients' self-report. The Clinically Based Assessment (CBA) includes domains on Joints and Muscles (A4), Intra- and Extra-Oral Tissues (A5) and Teeth and Restorations (A6), based on information collected by an examiner. The Instrumentally Based Assessment (IBA) includes domains on Sleep Bruxism (A7), Awake Bruxism (A8) and the use of Additional Instruments (A9), based on the information gathered with the use of technological devices. Axis B includes the self-reported information (subject-based report) on factors and conditions that may have an etiological or comorbid association with bruxism. It includes domains on Psychosocial Assessment (B1), Concurrent Sleep-related Conditions Assessment (B2), Concurrent Non-Sleep Conditions Assessment (B3), Prescribed Medications and Use of Substances Assessment (B4) and Additional Factors Assessment (B5). As a rule, whenever possible, existing instruments, either in full or partial form (i.e. specific subscales), are included. A user's guide for scoring the different items is also provided to ease administration. CONCLUSIONS: The instrument is now ready for on-field testing and further refinement. It can be anticipated that it will help in collecting data on bruxism in such a comprehensive way to have an impact on several clinical and research fields.

Tooth Wear Evaluation System 2.0-Evaluation of diagnostic reliability in the assessment of signs and symptoms for tooth wear by non-experts.

BACKGROUND: Tooth wear is a multifactorial condition that manifests through various signs and symptoms. These individual signs and symptoms were described in multiple studies, leading to the inclusion in TWES 2.0 (Tooth Wear Evaluation System 2.0) and the forthcoming DC-TW (Diagnostic Criteria for Tooth Wear). However, a study evaluating their reliability has yet to be conducted. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to examine the reliability in the assessment of 6 signs of pathological tooth wear and 18 clinical signs and symptoms determining aetiology, all of which are included in the TWES 2.0/DC-TW. METHODS: 48 dental students (operators) evaluated patient cases from a patient pool of 14 patients on dental casts and high-resolution intraoral photographs. The agreement between all operators for each sign and symptom was calculated based on ICC (Intraclass Correlation Coefficients). Additionally, the agreement of each operator's evaluation with a predefined sample solution was calculated based on Cohen's kappa. RESULTS: Inter-user agreement ranged from near perfect (0.91) to poor (0.02) for the various pathology signs or aetiology symptoms of tooth wear (mean 0.32). The agreements of the operator's ratings compared to the sample solution resulted in Cohen's kappa from 0.18 to 1 (mean 0.59) for the pathology signs and ranged from 0.02 to 0.51 for the aetiology signs (mean 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: The reliability of the signs and symptoms examined and the ability of individual investigators to correctly identify and assign signs and symptoms varied widely. The current assessment tools for the qualification of tooth wear need further refinement, and examiners need intensive training in tooth wear assessment.

The development of the Standardised Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB): An international road map.

This paper summarises the background reasoning and work that led to the selection of the items included in the Standardised Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB), also introducing the list of items. The instrument is currently being tested for face validity and on-field comprehension. The underlying premise is that the different motor activities included in the bruxism spectrum (e.g. clenching vs. grinding, with or without teeth contact) potentially need to be discriminated from each other, based on their purportedly different aetiology, comorbidities and potential consequences. Focus should be on a valid impression of the activities' frequency, intensity and duration. The methods that can be used for the above purposes can be grouped into strategies that collect information from the patient's history (subject-based), from the clinical assessment performed by an examiner (clinically based) or from the use of instruments to measure certain outcomes (instrumentally based). The three strategies can apply to all aspects of bruxism (i.e. status, comorbid conditions, aetiology and consequences). The STAB will help gathering information on many aspects, factors and conditions that are currently poorly investigated in the field of bruxism. To this purpose, it is divided into two axes. Axis A includes the self-reported information on bruxism status and potential consequences (subject-based report) together with the clinical (examiner report) and instrumental assessment (technology report). Axis B includes the self-reported information (subject-based report) on factors and conditions that may have an etiological or comorbid role for bruxism. This comprehensive multidimensional assessment system will allow building predictive model for clinical and research purposes.

Towards a Standardized Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB)-Overview and general remarks of a multidimensional bruxism evaluation system.

The aim of the present paper was to give an overview of the general project and to present the macrostructure of a comprehensive multidimensional toolkit for the assessment of bruxism, viz. a bruxism evaluation system. This is a necessary intermediate step that will be detailed in a successive extended publication and will ultimately lead to the definition of a Standardized Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB) as the final product. Two invitation-only workshops were held during the 2018 and 2019 General Session & Exhibition of the International Association for Dental Research (IADR) meetings. Participants of the IADR closed meetings were split into two groups, to put the basis for a multidimensional evaluation system composed of two main axes: an evaluation Axis A with three assessment domains (ie subject-based, clinically based and instrumentally based assessment) and an aetiological/risk factors Axis B assessing different groups of factors and conditions (ie psychosocial assessment; concurrent sleep and non-sleep conditions; drug and substance use or abuse; and additional factors). The work of the two groups that led to the identification of different domains for assessment is summarised in this manuscript, along with a road map for future researches. Such an approach will allow clinicians and researchers to modulate evaluation of bruxism patients with a comprehensive look at the clinical impact of the different bruxism activities and aetiologies. The ultimate goal of this multidimensional system is to facilitate the refinement of decision-making algorithms in the clinical setting.

Reliability of an occlusal and nonocclusal tooth wear grading system: clinical use versus dental cast assessment.

The reliability of a newly developed tooth wear grading system was assessed both clinically and on dental casts by two observers using 20 participants. The reliability of clinical occlusal/incisal tooth wear grading was fair-to-good to excellent, while that of most of the clinical nonocclusal/nonincisal grades was at least fair-to-good. Dental cast assessment frequently yielded poor reliabilities, especially for nonocclusal/nonincisal surfaces. Hence, occlusal/incisal wear could be graded more reliably than nonocclusal/nonincisal wear, while the clinical assessment of tooth wear was more reliable than the grading of dental casts.