ABSTRACT
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to analyze the effectiveness of maxillary stabilization splint (SS) therapy to reduce headache (HA) intensity and HA frequency in patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD)-HA comorbidity. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using full-arch coverage, hard resin, and maxillary SS therapy were included. Electronic databases, including Cochrane Library, MEDLINE through PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE, were searched. The risk of bias was analyzed based on Cochrane’s handbook. The search yielded 247 references up to January 28, 2020. Nine RCTs were included at a high risk of bias. The comparison groups included other splints, counseling, jaw exercises, medications, neurologic treatment, and occlusal equilibration. Four studies reported a statistically significant reduction in HA intensity, and five studies reported significant improvement in HA frequency from baseline at 2-12 months in patients with TMD-HA comorbidity treated with a full-arch hard maxillary SS. HA frequency in tension-type HA (TTH) comorbid with TMD diagnoses of myofascial pain (MFP) or capsulitis/synovitis improved significantly with SS than that with full-arch maxillary non-occluding splint (NOS) in two studies. Comparison groups receiving hard partial-arch maxillary splint nociceptive trigeminal inhibition (NTI) showed statistically significant improvements in HA intensity in patients with mixed TMD phenotypes of MFP and disc displacement comorbid with “general HA.” Comparison groups receiving partial-arch maxillary resilient/soft splint (Relax) showed significant improvements in both HA intensity and frequency in patients with HA concomitant with MFP. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the improvement of pain intensity at 2-3 months with comparison of the splints (partial-arch soft [Relax], hard [NTI], and full-arch NOS) or splint use compliance at 6-12 months with comparison of the splints (partial-arch Relax and full-arch NOS) versus the SS groups in patients with various TMD-HA comorbidities. In conclusion, although SS therapy showed a statistically significant decrease in HA intensity and HA frequency when reported, the evidence quality was low due to the high bias risk and small sample size. Therefore, further studies are required.
ABSTRACT
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to analyze the effectiveness of maxillary stabilization splint (SS) therapy to reduce headache (HA) intensity and HA frequency in patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD)-HA comorbidity. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using full-arch coverage, hard resin, and maxillary SS therapy were included. Electronic databases, including Cochrane Library, MEDLINE through PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE, were searched. The risk of bias was analyzed based on Cochrane’s handbook. The search yielded 247 references up to January 28, 2020. Nine RCTs were included at a high risk of bias. The comparison groups included other splints, counseling, jaw exercises, medications, neurologic treatment, and occlusal equilibration. Four studies reported a statistically significant reduction in HA intensity, and five studies reported significant improvement in HA frequency from baseline at 2-12 months in patients with TMD-HA comorbidity treated with a full-arch hard maxillary SS. HA frequency in tension-type HA (TTH) comorbid with TMD diagnoses of myofascial pain (MFP) or capsulitis/synovitis improved significantly with SS than that with full-arch maxillary non-occluding splint (NOS) in two studies. Comparison groups receiving hard partial-arch maxillary splint nociceptive trigeminal inhibition (NTI) showed statistically significant improvements in HA intensity in patients with mixed TMD phenotypes of MFP and disc displacement comorbid with “general HA.” Comparison groups receiving partial-arch maxillary resilient/soft splint (Relax) showed significant improvements in both HA intensity and frequency in patients with HA concomitant with MFP. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the improvement of pain intensity at 2-3 months with comparison of the splints (partial-arch soft [Relax], hard [NTI], and full-arch NOS) or splint use compliance at 6-12 months with comparison of the splints (partial-arch Relax and full-arch NOS) versus the SS groups in patients with various TMD-HA comorbidities. In conclusion, although SS therapy showed a statistically significant decrease in HA intensity and HA frequency when reported, the evidence quality was low due to the high bias risk and small sample size. Therefore, further studies are required.
ABSTRACT
Background: Proper training on how to correctly handle loads is one key point for prevention of low back disorders. This study was conducted with the objectives of assessing manual material lifting activities and comparing two methods of training intervention in a porcelain company
Methods: In this randomized controlled trial which was conducted in a porcelain company, all male employees with lifting activities [n=204] participated. The data were collected using Nordic Musculoskeletal Disorders Questionnaire and Lift/ Lower Force Risk Assessment software for assessing manual material lifting. Intervention methods included booklet and oral training. Data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U and Chisquare tests using SPSS software [Version 17.0]
Results: The most prevalent musculoskeletal disorders symptoms were reported in the knee [52.5%], feet [45.1%], and lower back [43.6%]. Risk assessment before intervention showed that in 62.7% of the workers studied, the level of exposure to musculoskeletal risks was in Action Level [AL] 1, 31.9% in AL 2 and 5.4% in AL 3. The risk assessment after intervention showed that in 77.5% of the workers studied, the level of exposure to musculoskeletal risks was in Action Level [AL] 1, 20.6% in AL 2 and 2% in AL 3 [P<0.001]. Also, statistical analysis revealed that oral training [24.5%] was more effective than the booklet training [11.8%] [P=0.018]
Conclusion: This study showed that training intervention could be effective in correction of methods of manual material lifting of workers. It seems oral training for workers of porcelain industry is more effective than the booklet training