ABSTRACT
The Krogh-Poulsen Test is a classic instrument to measure dysfunction of the stomatognathic system whose psychometric properties are unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Krogh-Poulsen Test for the diagnosis of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). A cross-sectional study was designed, including 119 patients (63 patients with TMD and 56 healthy controls). Factorial validity, inter-rater reliability, error of measurement, diagnostic validity of the Krogh-Poulsen Test, and concurrent validity were analyzed. The Krogh-Poulsen Test showed a three-factor structure. The inter-rater agreement could be considered very good with a kappa index of 0.87 (95% CI 0.83-0.90) and Standard Error of Measurement of 0.79. Correlations were strong with other orofacial instruments, moderate with instruments measuring TMD-related disorders such as neck pain, headache, or dizziness, and poor with generic quality of life instruments. The Area Under the Curve ROC was 0.928 showing, for a cut-off point >1, a sensitivity of 90.48 (95% CI 80.4-96.4) and a specificity of 85.71 (95% CI 73.8-93.6) for the diagnosis of TMD disorders. The Krogh-Poulsen Test showed a three-factor structure, very good inter-rater reliability, a strong correlation with other orofacial instruments, and an excellent capacity to discriminate between patients with or without TMD.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Fonseca Anamnestic Index (FAI) offers a simple method to screen temporomandibular disorders (TMD). This study aimed to validate the Spanish version of the FAI in patients with TMD. METHODS: The sample consisted of 125 subjects (66 TMD and 59 controls) aged over 18 years. Construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, concurrent validity and capacity to discriminate between TMD and healthy subjects were analyzed. RESULTS: The Spanish version of the FAI showed a structure formed by three factors. Cronbach's alpha was 0.826. The reliability of the items varied between substantial to almost perfect and was excellent for the total score (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.937). The standard error of measurement (SEM) was 6.52, with a minimum detectable change (MDC) of 12.78. FAI score showed a significant correlation with headache, neck pain and vertigo measurements. A cut-off point >35 showed a sensitivity = 83.33% and a specificity = 77.97% in differentiating between healthy and TMD patients, with an area under the curve (AUC) = 0.865. CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish version of the FAI is a valid and reliable instrument for diagnosing people with TMD, with appropriate general clinimetric properties. Discrimination between patients with and without TMD is excellent.
