Correlation Between Salivary Biochemical Stress Indicators and Psychological Indicators

• Main Authors: Mirna Peco, Josipa Gelo, Danijel Crnković
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Sestre Milosrdnice University hospital, Institute of Clinical Medical Research 2018-01-01
• Series: Acta Clinica Croatica
• Subjects: Stress, Physiological; Stress, Psychological; Nervous System; Hydrocortisone; Salivary Glands; Exercise
• Online Access: http://hrcak.srce.hr/file/304937
• ISSN: 0353-9466; 1333-9451

– Saliva is a complex body fl uid that has various functions in the oral cavity. Central nervous system has the most important role in regulating salivation. Saliva as a sample is suitable for simplicity of sampling and because it contains analytes in the free active form. Stress is a condition in which the internal (psychophysical) balance of the body is disturbed. It activates the hypothalamicpituitary axis, so salivary cortisol is a free cortisol indicator that correlates well with its serum value and refl ects the free fraction that is biologically active. At the same time, stress conditions stimulate the sympathetic neuronal system causing change in the secretion of salivary α-amylase from salivary glands. The hypothesis of this study was that students with daily intensive physical activity are exposed to chronic stress compared to other students who have minimal physical activity. Th e study included 54 healthy volunteers, students of the University of Zagreb, divided into two groups. One volunteer group consisted of physically active volunteers (n=27) from the Faculty of Kinesiology (FK), and the other group consisted of physically inactive volunteers (n=27) from other faculties (OF). The subjects were fi rst administered a psychological test that consisted of two questionnaires, Quality of Life Questionnaire and Questionnaire of Stressful Styles, and then underwent sampling of saliva. By comparing biochemical and psychological indicators in relation to stress, it was concluded that the two groups of students were equalized and that there was no objective support for either group to be considered exposed to chronic stress. Despite the substantial diff erences in physical activity, there was no diff erence between the two student populations.