Daniele Manfredini

Prof. Dr. Daniele Manfredini

Department of Neuroscience, School of Dentistry, UNIPD, University of Padova, Padova, Italy
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

24Years (2003-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
21 June 2018 in Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
FLFrank Lobbezoo
Frank Lobbezoo
JAJari Ahlberg
Jari Ahlberg
KRK. G. Raphael
K. G. Raphael
PWP. Wetselaar
P. Wetselaar
AGA. G. Glaros
A. G. Glaros
DMDaniele Manfredini
Daniele Manfredini
Summary: In 2013, consensus was obtained on a definition of bruxism as repetitive masticatory muscle activity characterised by clenching or grinding of the teeth and/or by bracing or thrusting of the mandible and specified as either sleep bruxism or awake bruxism. In addition, a grading system was proposed to determine the likelihood that a certain assessment of bruxism actually yields a valid outcome. This study discusses the need for an updated consensus and has the following aims: (i) to further clarify the 2013 definition and to develop separate definitions for sleep and awake bruxism; (ii) to determine whether bruxism is a disorder rather than a behaviour that can be a risk factor for certain clinical conditions; (iii) to re‐examine the 2013 grading system; and (iv) to develop a research agenda. It was concluded that: (i) sleep and awake bruxism are masticatory muscle activities that occur during sleep (characterised as rhythmic or non‐rhythmic) and wakefulness (characterised by repetitive or sustained tooth contact and/or by bracing or thrusting of the mandible), respectively; (ii) in otherwise healthy individuals, bruxism should not be considered as a disorder, but rather as a behaviour that can be a risk (and/or protective) factor for certain clinical consequences; (iii) both non‐instrumental approaches (notably self‐report) and instrumental approaches (notably electromyography) can be employed to assess bruxism; and (iv) standard cut‐off points for establishing the presence or absence of bruxism should not be used in otherwise healthy individuals; rather, bruxism‐related masticatory muscle activities should be assessed in the behaviour's continuum.

1 October 2011 in Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology Oral Radiology and Endodontology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DMDaniele Manfredini
Daniele Manfredini
LGLuca Guarda-Nardini
Luca Guarda-Nardini
EWEphraim Winocur
Ephraim Winocur
FPFabio Piccotti
Fabio Piccotti
JAJari Ahlberg
Jari Ahlberg
FLFrank Lobbezoo
Frank Lobbezoo

1 June 2010 in Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology Oral Radiology and Endodontology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DMDaniele Manfredini
Daniele Manfredini
FLFrank Lobbezoo
Frank Lobbezoo

2 July 2017 in Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DMDaniele Manfredini
Daniele Manfredini
LLL. Lombardo
L. Lombardo
GSG. Siciliani
G. Siciliani

24 May 2013 in Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DMDaniele Manfredini
Daniele Manfredini
CRC. Restrepo
C. Restrepo
KDKranya Diaz-Serrano
Kranya Diaz-Serrano
EWE. Winocur
E. Winocur
FLF. Lobbezoo
F. Lobbezoo

10 February 2023 in Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
DMDaniele Manfredini
Daniele Manfredini
JAJari Ahlberg
Jari Ahlberg
GAGhizlane Aarab
Ghizlane Aarab
SBSteven D. Bender
Steven D. Bender
ABAlessandro Bracci
Alessandro Bracci
FLFrank Lobbezoo
Frank Lobbezoo
Objective: This paper aims to present and describe the Standardised Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB), an instrument that was developed to provide a multidimensional evaluation of bruxism status, comorbid conditions, aetiology and consequences.Methods: The rationale for creating the tool and the road map that led to the selection of items included in the STAB has been discussed in previous publications.Results: The tool consists of two axes, specifically dedicated to the evaluation of bruxism status and consequences (Axis A) and of bruxism risk and etiological factors and comorbid conditions (Axis B). The tool includes 14 domains, accounting for a total of 66 items. Axis A includes the self‐reported information on bruxism status and possible consequences (subject‐based report) together with the clinical (examiner report) and instrumental (technology report) assessment. The Subject‐Based Assessment (SBA) includes domains on Sleep Bruxism (A1), Awake Bruxism (A2) and Patient's Complaints (A3), with information based on patients' self‐report. The Clinically Based Assessment (CBA) includes domains on Joints and Muscles (A4), Intra‐ and Extra‐Oral Tissues (A5) and Teeth and Restorations (A6), based on information collected by an examiner. The Instrumentally Based Assessment (IBA) includes domains on Sleep Bruxism (A7), Awake Bruxism (A8) and the use of Additional Instruments (A9), based on the information gathered with the use of technological devices. Axis B includes the self‐reported information (subject‐based report) on factors and conditions that may have an etiological or comorbid association with bruxism. It includes domains on Psychosocial Assessment (B1), Concurrent Sleep‐related Conditions Assessment (B2), Concurrent Non‐Sleep Conditions Assessment (B3), Prescribed Medications and Use of Substances Assessment (B4) and Additional Factors Assessment (B5). As a rule, whenever possible, existing instruments, either in full or partial form (i.e. specific subscales), are included. A user's guide for scoring the different items is also provided to ease administration.Conclusions: The instrument is now ready for on‐field testing and further refinement. It can be anticipated that it will help in collecting data on bruxism in such a comprehensive way to have an impact on several clinical and research fields.