COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF MASTICATORY EFFICIENCY AND NUTRITIONAL STATUS OF PATIENTS BEFORE AND AFTER A FULL MOUTH REHABILITATAION -PROSPECTIVE CLINICAL TRIAL

Aim:To evaluate masticatory efficiency and nutritional status prior and subsequent to a full mouth
rehabilitation therapy
Materials and Methods:The study followed the CONSORT guidelines and was a prospective clinical trial.
This trial was conducted on ten patients who were undergoing full mouth rehabilitation. Masticatory efficiency
was calculated before the start and 1 month post completion of rehabilitation where the subjects were given 9
grams of peanuts (3 grams – 3 times). The participant was instructed to complete 40 chewing strokes. The
masticated food was subsequently collected in a disposable container. Additionally, the participant rinsed their
mouth with water twice, and the resulting rinsate was combined with the chewed food in the same disposable
container. Following thorough mixing of the chewed food using a glass rod, the mixture was strained through a
10 mesh sieve. This specific test serves the purpose of quantitatively assessing the chewed food. The strained
liquid, referred to as the filtrate, was then carefully transferred into tubes and subjected to centrifugation at
3000 revolutions per minute for a duration of 5 minutes. This centrifugal process effectively separated the
filtrate into two distinct components: a solid pellet and a liquid supernatant. The supernatant, or the liquid
portion, was subsequently discarded, while the pellet, or the solid residue, was weighed using a digital scale. In
this study, masticatory performance was quantified according to the methodology proposed by Yurkstas and
Manly. This evaluation encompassed assessing particle size, as determined by the size of the sieve employed,
by calculating the ratio of the weight of the test food that passed through the sieve to the total weight of the test
food that was recovered. This ratio was then expressed as a percentage. The initial wet weight of the materials
was computed as the starting point for these calculations. The specimens were then placed in a hotair oven at
40℃ for 8 hours and again the dry weights were measured. Fasting venous blood samples from each participant
were collected for means of measuring hemoglobin, total serum calcium, total serum protein, and total
cholesterol levels as indicators of nutritional status. The tests were carried out at similar intervals as chewing
efficiency.

Results:All of the patients showed a statistically significant improvement in masticatory efficiency post full
mouth rehabilitation (p <.001) which was calculated with Yurkstas and Manly formula. There was no
significant relationship between age, gender and occlsal scheme provided to the masticatory efficiency pre
and post FMR. Paired sample t test revealed that haemoglobin, total serum protein and total ionic calcium
showed a significant improvement post full mouth rehabilitation at 1 month follow up (p<0.05). There was
no statistically significant difference in cholesterol values.
Conclusion:We can conclude that full mouth rehabilitation leads to a notable increase in masticatory
efficiency. A significant improvement in nutritional status was also seen post completion of therapy. There was
no influence of age, gender and occlusal scheme on chewing efficiency.