Copyright
©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Clin Cases. Jul 16, 2022; 10(20): 6876-6889
Published online Jul 16, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i20.6876
Published online Jul 16, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i20.6876
Figure 5 Comparison of the normalized muscle activity ratio (mean ± SD) during unilateral chewing.
A: Comparison of the normalized muscle activity (NMA) ratio during unilateral chewing of candy on the preferred side (PS); B: Comparison of the NMA ratio during unilateral chewing of candy on the non-PS (NPS); C: Comparison of the NMA ratio during unilateral chewing of almond on the PS; D: Comparison of the NMA ratio during unilateral chewing of almond on the NPS; E: Comparison of the masseter muscle NMA ratio on the working side of NPS unilateral chewing of almond. aComparison to the non-bruxism group, P < 0.05; bComparison to the centric bruxism group, P < 0.05. CB: Centric bruxism; ECB: Eccentric bruxism; NB: Non-bruxism; WS: Working side; NWS: Non-working side; TA: Temporalis anterior; MM: Masseter muscle.
- Citation: Lan KW, Jiang LL, Yan Y. Comparative study of surface electromyography of masticatory muscles in patients with different types of bruxism. World J Clin Cases 2022; 10(20): 6876-6889
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v10/i20/6876.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v10.i20.6876