Translation, cultural adaptation, and preliminary data evaluation of the Standardized Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB) and BruxScreen in Turkey

TL;DR

This study translated and adapted two bruxism assessment tools for use in Turkey and found them to be valid and useful for evaluating bruxism in Turkish populations.

Contribution

The study provides a culturally adapted Turkish version of two standardized bruxism assessment tools with preliminary validation.

Findings

The Turkish versions of STAB and BruxScreen were successfully translated and culturally adapted.

Pilot testing showed high comprehensibility, feasibility, and acceptability across participants.

Preliminary data supported the clinical utility of the instruments in the Turkish population.

Abstract

Background: The Standardized Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB)
and Bruxism Screener (BruxScreen) are instruments developed to support the
structured evaluation of bruxism across clinical and research settings. For
effective use in different populations, translation, cultural adaptation, and
preliminary data collection are essential. This study aimed to translate the STAB
and BruxScreen into Turkish and evaluate their comprehensibility, feasibility,
acceptability, and preliminary clinical applicability. Methods:
Translation and cultural adaptation of both instruments into Turkish were
performed according to original developers’ guidelines. A panel of 12 experts in
prosthodontics and/or orofacial pain supervised the process. Independent forward
and backward translations were conducted and pilot-tested using the “Three-Step
Test Interview” among patients, dentists, and dental students. Additionally,
preliminary data were collected using selected components of both instruments to
explore their clinical utility. Results: Both instruments were
translated and culturally adapted. Pilot testing confirmed the face validity and
demonstrated high levels of comprehensibility, feasibility, and acceptability
across participant groups. Preliminary data collected from patients supported the
instruments’ applicability and initial clinical utility within the Turkish
population. Conclusions: The Turkish versions of both instruments appear
to be valid and feasible tools for standardized bruxism assessment. The observed
alignment between the outcomes of both instruments underscores their
complementary nature and supports their combined use. Their integration may
enhance the multidimensional evaluation of bruxism and contribute to
international efforts aimed at refining and harmonizing assessment protocols
across populations.