Page 32 - SPEMD_59-1

Revista Portuguesa de Estomatologia,
Medicina Dentária e Cirurgia Maxilofacial

rev port estomatol med dent cir maxilofac. 2018;59(1):24-29

Original research

Concordance analysis between two questionnaires
of self-reported bruxism

c
a
b
Helena Lenz Piúma , Gustavo Frainer Barbosa , Eduardo Aydos Villarinho ,
Rosemary Sadami Arai Shinkai *
c,
a Clínica privada, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil
b Faculdade de Odontologia, Universidade Luterana do Brasil, Torres, RS, Brasil
c Faculdade de Odontologia, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Objectives: Consensus has not been reached regarding the diagnosis of bruxism. The present
Received 14 February 2018 study analyzed the agreement between two self-reporting questionnaires for the diagnosis
Accepted 24 May 2018 of possible bruxism.
Available online 22 June 2018 Methods: A non-probabilistic consecutive sample was selected among adult patients trea-
ted with implant-supported fixed prosthesis from 2010 to 2016. The sample consisted of 65
Keywords: patients (42 women) undergoing oral rehabilitation with fixed implant-supported prosthe-
Agreement ses, who answered two structured questionnaires (Q1 and Q2) for the diagnosis of bruxism.
Bruxism Data were tested for agreement between both questionnaires using the Cohen’s kappa
Diagnosis coefficient.
Results: The results showed a fair agreement (kappa = 0.356) between the two self-reporting
questionnaires. Only 50% of the patients with a positive bruxism diagnosis in Q1 had the
same diagnosis in Q2 and 46% with a positive diagnosis in Q2 had a similar result in Q1.
Regarding the negative diagnosis of bruxism, 87% of patients with a negative diagnosis in
Q1 also had a negative diagnosis in Q2, and 88% with a negative diagnosis in Q2 had a
similar diagnosis in Q1.
Conclusion: The results suggest that, although the use of self-reporting questionnaires
for bruxism is a clinically easy method to apply in research and dental practice, this
method presents limitations for obtaining a precise diagnosis of possible bruxism. (Rev
Port Estomatol Med Dent Cir Maxilofac. 2018;59(1):24-29)
© 2018 Sociedade Portuguesa de Estomatologia e Medicina Dentária.
Publicado por SPEMD. Este é um artigo Open Access sob uma licença CC BY -NC -ND
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by -nc -nd/4.0/).

* Corresponding author.
Correio eletrónico: rshinkai@pucrs.br (Rosemary Sadami Arai Shinkai).
http://doi.org/10.24873/j.rpemd.2018.06.219
1646-2890/© 2017 Sociedade Portuguesa de Estomatologia e Medicina Dentária. Published by SPEMD.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).