ABSTRACT
AIM: This topical review presents common patients' misbeliefs about temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and discusses their possible impact on the diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. We also discussed the possible influence of the beliefs and behaviours of healthcare providers on the beliefs of patients with TMD and suggested possible strategies to overcome the negative impacts of such misbeliefs. METHODS: This topical review was based on a non-systematic search for studies about the beliefs of patients and healthcare professionals about TMD in PubMed and Embase. RESULTS: Patients' beliefs can negatively impact the diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of TMD. These beliefs can be modulated by several factors such as culture, psychosocial aspects, gender, level of knowledge and previous experiences. Moreover, primary healthcare professionals, including dentists, may lack sufficient experience and skills regarding TMD diagnosis and treatment. Misbeliefs of the healthcare professionals can be based on outdated evidence that is not supported by rigorous methodological investigations. Education and dissemination of knowledge to patients and the general population are effective for prevention, promotion of health and disruption of the cycle of misinformation and dissemination of misbeliefs. CONCLUSION: The lack of basic information about TMD and the dissemination of mistaken and outdated concepts may delay the diagnosis, hinder the treatment, and consequently increase the risk of worsening the condition. Education is key to overcome TMD misbeliefs.
Subject(s)
Facial Pain , Temporomandibular Joint Disorders , Facial Pain/therapy , Humans , Temporomandibular Joint Disorders/psychologyABSTRACT
ABSTRACT: There is a need to further develop telemedicine approaches because of the immediate and perhaps long-term consequences of the coronavirus disease 2019. Thus, a remote protocol for assessment of patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD) was developed, and the agreement of this protocol was compared with the guidelines of the Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD). A total of 16 individuals were first assessed by a reference standard examination (RSE) and 3 other examinations applied in a random order by 3 examiners: standard physical examination (standard examination), physical examination keeping 2-m distance (physical distanced examination), and examination conducted with the aid of video communication technology (video communication examination). The primary outcomes were the diagnoses of myalgia of the masseter and temporalis muscles and arthralgia. The diagnoses of intra-articular joint disorders were considered secondary outcomes because of a less impact on psychosocial functioning and quality of life when compared with the pain-related diagnoses. The Fleiss kappa coefficient and its 95% confidence interval were computed to determine the level of agreement in diagnoses between each examination protocol and the RSE. There was substantial to almost perfect agreement between the RSE and all the examination protocols for the diagnoses of myalgia (0.86-1.00) and arthralgia (0.74-0.87) (P < 0.001). On the other hand, there was an overall poor agreement (0.30-0.58) between the RSE and all the protocols for the diagnosis of disk displacement with reduction. Remote assessment of patients with pain-related TMD is feasible and presents a high degree of accuracy.
