The effects of a temporarily manipulated dental occlusion on the position of the spine: a comparison during standing and walking.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The relationship between dental occlusion and body posture or even the spine position is often analyzed and confirmed. However, this relationship has not been systematically investigated for standing and walking.

PURPOSE

To examine whether a symmetric or asymmetric dental occlusion block, using 4 mm thick silicon panels, can significantly change the spine position (cervical, thoracic, or lumbar region) during standing and walking.

STUDY DESIGN

The following study is a cross-sectional study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

This study was carried out with 23 healthy subjects (18 women, 5 men) without discomfort in the temporomandibular system or body movement apparatus.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Position changes (millimeter) of the spine (cervical, thoracic, lumbar) in frontal, sagittal, and transverse planes of motion.

METHODS

The upper spine position was quantified with an ultrasonic distance measurement system (sonoSens Monitor). Every subject placed the 4 mm thick silicon panel systematically between the left/right premolars or the front teeth. Differences between the habitual and manipulated occlusion positions were determined by the Friedman test, followed by pairwise comparisons with applied Bonferroni-Holm correction.

RESULTS

During standing and walking there were significant (p≤.05) differences between the occlusion block conditions and the habitual dental position in all body planes except in the right lumbar region during walking. In addition, differences within the manipulated occlusion position could be detected. Significant differences were also shown between the standing and walking trials in the frontal, sagittal, and transverse planes, particularly with respect to the lumbar region (p≤.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Symmetrical and asymmetrical occlusion blocks in the premolar region can be associated with changes in all three spine regions during standing and walking. The results showed highly similar reaction patterns in all spine positions, regardless of the location of the silicon panel. Between standing and walking, the main differences were in the lumbar spine. The results suggest a relationship between the chewing and the movement system. However, it must be stated that this study has no direct clinical impact. The study design cannot determine the causality of the observed associations; also the clinical significance of the small postural changes remains unknown.