Premium
Is bruxism a disorder or a behaviour? Rethinking the international consensus on defining and grading of bruxism
Author(s) -
Raphael K. G.,
Santiago V.,
Lobbezoo F.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
journal of oral rehabilitation
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.991
H-Index - 93
eISSN - 1365-2842
pISSN - 0305-182X
DOI - 10.1111/joor.12413
Subject(s) - grading (engineering) , psychology , consensus conference , sleep bruxism , psychiatry , clinical psychology , psychotherapist , medicine , civil engineering , engineering , electromyography
Summary Inspired by the international consensus on defining and grading of bruxism (Lobbezoo F, Ahlberg J, Glaros AG , Kato T, Koyano K, Lavigne GJ et al. J Oral Rehabil . 2013;40:2), this commentary examines its contribution and underlying assumptions for defining sleep bruxism ( SB ). The consensus’ parsimonious redefinition of bruxism as a behaviour is an advance, but we explore an implied question: might SB be more than behaviour? Behaviours do not inherently require clinical treatment, making the consensus‐proposed ‘diagnostic grading system’ inappropriate. However, diagnostic grading might be useful, if SB were considered a disorder. Therefore, to fully appreciate the contribution of the consensus statement, we first consider standards and evidence for determining whether SB is a disorder characterised by harmful dysfunction or a risk factor increasing probability of a disorder. Second, the strengths and weaknesses of the consensus statement's proposed ‘diagnostic grading system’ are examined. The strongest evidence‐to‐date does not support SB as disorder as implied by ‘diagnosis’. Behaviour alone is not diagnosed; disorders are. Considered even as a grading system of behaviour, the proposed system is weakened by poor sensitivity of self‐report for direct polysomnographic ( PSG )‐classified SB and poor associations between clinical judgments of SB and portable PSG ; reliance on dichotomised reports; and failure to consider SB behaviour on a continuum, measurable and definable through valid behavioural observation. To date, evidence for validity of self‐report or clinician report in placing SB behaviour on a continuum is lacking, raising concerns about their potential utility in any bruxism behavioural grading system, and handicapping future study of whether SB may be a useful risk factor for, or itself a disorder requiring treatment.