Lack of agreement between objective and subjective measures in the evaluation of masticatory function: A preliminary study.
This is a title of a recently published article in Physiology & Behavior 2018 Feb 1;184:220-225 .
The authors concluded that "no agreement between the objective and subjective methods was observed in this sample of healthy adolescents".
Shall we use both methods (each time) in the evaluation of masticatory function or one is enough? Which one?
Dear Mohammed
Thank you for bringing attention to this paper and for raising an interesting question. The authors' conclusion that there is a weak association between subjective and objective outcomes corroborates the majority of previous studies that have attempted to identify aspects of and described correlations between chewing/mastication/occlusion/teeth/diet/TMD/rehabilitation/cognitive function/OHQOL/ etc.
The answer to your question: "Shall we use both methods (each time) in the evaluation of masticatory function or one is enough? Which one?" have a simple answer, which is no, we shall not use both methods each time. There is a triad between qualitative data (Patient-reported outcome), a PRO-measure (PROM) that supposedly reflects the patients chewing/masticatory ability, capacity, difficulty/problems versus some form of quantitative data (comminution/food mix ability under an experimental testing condition). Of the three dimensions, we need as clinicians to address the patient-reported findings primarily, and not necessarily by use of a PROM. As clinical researchers, the question is more open.
Part of the complexity when attempting to answer your question is that the current literature contains anarchy in the use of terminology. E.g. chewing/masticatory function/dysfunction appears in journal titles where the contents may describe either subjective or objective data, and the same applies to titles containing the terms chewing/masticatory efficiency/performance. I have described further challenges when reading the literature in question in a relatively recent review (Article Methodological challenges in the study of dental occlusion
Asbjørn Jokstad .. Thank you very much dear Professor for your reply and explanation. Thank you once again for the attached review. It is really very informative and helpful in understanding the relationship between these terms.
The latest edition of THE GLOSSARY OF PROSTHODONTIC TERMS (Ninth Edition) has also released some new definitions/synonyms for some of these terms.
As you mentioned, the subjective method (PROM) is still a very important measure which should be taken into consideration because it is directly related to the patient's satisfaction of the treatment. On the other hand, one should not rely on this measure only!
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematical Sciences
- Statistics
- Probability
- Probability Theory
- Reliability