JDR JDR Most Read Articles
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Proeschel, P.A.
Right arrow Articles by Raum, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Proeschel, P.A.
Right arrow Articles by Raum, J.
J Dent Res 82(8): 617-620, 2003
© 2003 International and American Associations for Dental Research


RESEARCH REPORT
Clinical

Task-dependence of Jaw Elevator and Depressor Co-activation

P.A. Proeschel*, and J. Raum

Department of Prosthodontics, University Dental Clinic, University of Erlangen-Nürnberg, Glückstrasse 11, D 91054 Erlangen, Germany;

* corresponding author, peter.proeschel{at}rzmail.uni-erlangen.de

Elevator muscle activity per unit bite-force has been shown to be higher in chewing than in isometric biting. We tested the hypothesis that surplus elevator activity is evoked in response to a possible co-activation of jaw-opener muscles during the masticatory power stroke. In 32 subjects, digastric and bilateral masseter and temporalis activities were recorded during unilateral chewing of test foods, isometric biting on a force transducer, and during balancing of the jaw against maximum effort of depressor muscles. During elevator peak effort in chewing, the digastric activity was 113% higher than during peak effort in isometric biting. Comparison of balancing and chewing trials revealed that a 6% increase of elevator activity would suffice to compensate for this increased depressor action. Elevator activity in chewing, however, was up to 130% higher than in clenching. We conclude that depressor counteraction could have only a minor influence on the generation of surplus muscle activity in chewing.

KEY WORDS: antagonistic co-activation • masticatory muscles • EMG • force-estimation







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
IADR Journals Advances in Dental Research ®
Journal of Dental Research ® Critical Reviews (1990-2004)
Copyright © 2003 Institutional Access Guidelines