A preliminary study to find out maximum occlusal bite force in Indian individuals

• Main Authors: Veena Jain (Author), Vijay Prakash Mathur (Author), Rajath Sasidharan Pillai (Author), Sandeep Kalra (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2014-01-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 0970-9290; 1998-3603; 10.4103/0970-9290.138330
• Keywords: Anthropometric features; facial form; facial profile; mean maximum bite force; piezoelectric transducer; Dentistry; RK1-715
• Source: Indian Journal of Dental Research, Vol 25, Iss 3, Pp 325-330 (2014)

Purpose: This preliminary hospital based study was designed to measure the mean maximum bite force (MMBF) in healthy Indian individuals. An attempt was made to correlate MMBF with body mass index (BMI) and some of the anthropometric features. Methodology: A total of 358 healthy subjects in the age range of 18-47 years (mean age = 26.66 ± 6.83) were selected following the selection criteria. Demographic details along with general physical and facial parameters such as height, weight, facial form, facial profile, arch form, and palatal contour were recorded in a predesigned proforma. The maximum bite force was recorded on both (right and left) sides using a specially designed piezoelectric transducer based device. Results: The MMBF in Indian individuals was found to be 372.39 ± 175.93 Newton (N). Males had significantly higher (P = 0.000) MMBF (448.47 ± 191.82 N) as compared to females (296.31 ± 116.79 N). Facial form (P = 0.001) and palatal contour (P = 0.000) showed a significant relationship with MMBF. Subjects having square facial form (421.34 ± 187.32 N) showed significantly higher MMBF as compared to other facial forms, that is, square tapered (358.86 ± 143.56 N; P = 0.038), ovoid (338.40 ± 163.02 N; P = 0.000) and tapered (349.22 ± 184.82 N; P = 0.028). Subjects with flat palatal contour showed significantly higher MMBF when compared to high (P = 0.002) and medium palatal (P = 0.002) contour. Though facial profile was not significantly related to MMBF, it was significantly higher in subjects having concave facial profile when compared to convex (P = 0.045) and straight (P = 0.039) facial profile. BMI and arch form showed no significant relationship with MMBF. Conclusion: The MMBF is found to be affected by gender and some of the anthropometric features like facial form and palatal contour.