[Splint therapy in temporomandibular dysfunction]. / Spalktherapie bij temporomandibulaire dysfuncties.

In a study of 118 patients with temporomandibular dysfunction treated with occlusal splint therapy, symptoms of pain and limited mobility of the mandible had decreased more distinct than clicking sounds of the temporomandibular joints. Interestingly, an untreated control group showed similar results after two years follow-up.

Diagnostic subgroups of craniomandibular disorders. Part I: Self-report data and clinical findings.

An overview is given of the most commonly investigated signs and symptoms associated with craniomandibular disorders as detected in a population of patients with craniomandibular disorders and in four defined diagnostic subgroups. The information was collected with a questionnaire and during an extensive clinical examination. Comparison of self-report and clinical data indicated that these two methods reveal different aspects of the patient's complaints and should be interpreted in their own way. The results showed that no statistically significant differences could be found between the four diagnostic subgroups with respect to occlusal factors, trauma, and clinically assessed parafunctional habits. The groups differed considerably with respect to general characteristics, pain variables, signs of craniomandibular disorders, self-reported para-functional habits, psychosocial factors, and general health factors. However, despite the reduction in clinical characteristics of the four subgroups, there was little reduction in the diversity of factors associated with craniomandibular disorders. This implicates that almost all factors associated with craniomandibular disorders may influence the initiation and perpetuation of the different disorders in the individual patient, and therefore, remain of interest in future research.

Diagnostic subgroups of craniomandibular disorders. Part II: Symptom profiles.

An overview is given of the following four well-defined diagnostic subgroups of patients who have craniomandibular disorders: those with a mainly myogenous component; those with internal derangement with reduction; those with internal derangement without reduction; and those with osteoarthrosis. Although it was inevitable that the subgroups were not completely homogeneous, symptom profiles differed considerably. There even seemed to be reasons to distinguish two osteoarthrosis groups in future research. Although the identification of clinically significant factors in a given patient with craniomandibular disorders remains a difficult clinical task, the symptom profiles provide a framework that may give more insight into the background of the complaint and into possible contributing factors. The symptom profiles also provide the possibility of a more directed choice of treatment and a treatment evaluation that is more aimed at the specific characteristics of the subgroups. It therefore may be concluded that, to increase insight into craniomandibular disorders, the evaluation of diagnostic subgroups has to be preferred in the assessment of a heterogeneous group of patients with craniomandibular disorders.

Reliability of clinical findings in temporomandibular disorders.

The aim of the present investigation was to study the interexaminer reliability of orthopedic tests and palpation techniques routinely used in the clinical diagnosis of disorders of the masticatory system. The tests were performed by a dentist and a physiotherapist, who both used the tests routinely when examining patients with temporomandibular disorders. Seventy-nine patients participated in this study. In the analysis, percentage agreement, intraclass correlation, and Cohen's kappa were used. The interexaminer reliability of the tests measuring maximal active mouth opening and registration of clicking during active mouth opening was high. The interexaminer reliability was fair for the tests measuring the intensity of pain during active movements and moderate for tests recording joint sounds (kappa = 0.47 to 0.59). There was high interobserver agreement on several items of the traction and translation tests, although the kappa values were low. The interexaminer reliability of the multitest scores for compression was substantial for joint sounds (kappa = 0.66) and fair for pain (kappa = 0.40). The interexaminer reliability of the multitest scores for muscle palpation and joint palpation was moderate (kappa = 0.51) and fair (kappa = 0.33), respectively. It can be concluded that most variables determined during active movements can be measured with satisfactory reliability, whereas variables for other tests are not measured with the same reliability on the basis of the kappa scores. The main symptoms of temporomandibular disorders can be evaluated reliably with multitest scores. It is recommended that clinicians calibrate their techniques regularly to improve the reliability of results in daily practice.

Assessment of treatment outcome in patients with craniomandibular dysfunction.

Psychosocial, socio-demographic and symptom characteristics have been shown to be associated with treatment outcome in patients with craniomandibular dysfunction (CMD). This study was performed to assess to what extent symptoms and correlates of CMD change as a consequence of conservative treatment for CMD. Treatment outcome in a group of CMD patients treated with a stabilization splint (experimental group) was compared with that of a group of patients with CMD who were not treated for CMD (control group). Patients in the experimental group had fewer symptoms of CMD at the end of treatment. However, several symptoms and correlates of CMD also improved in the control group (severity of pain, joint noises, ear symptoms). It was therefore questioned whether all improvements in symptoms and correlates of CMD in the experimental group could be attributed to the treatment received. Results suggest that the main improvement that might be ascribed to therapy was a decrease in 'jaw symptoms'. There was a noticeable decrease in depression and an increased use of 'planned actions and rational thinking' as a coping style in the experimental group whereas these variables did not change in the control group. Implications and suggestions for further research are discussed.

Craniomandibular dysfunction: patient characteristics related to treatment outcome.

In a previous study it was concluded that only a few changes in symptoms related to craniomandibular dysfunction (CMD) could be attributed to therapy. It was suggested that psychosocial and socio-demographic variables, as well as symptom characteristics, could be responsible for the unconvincing treatment outcome in patients treated with a splint. The present study was performed to investigate whether socio-demographic characteristics, symptom characteristics and various psychosocial variables are associated with treatment outcome in patients with CMD treated with a splint. Treatment outcome was determined by using self-reported follow-up data. Results showed that patients with a negative treatment outcome were older, reported more and more severe symptoms and correlates of CMD, reported fewer stressors and more frequently considered health to be determined by external factors than patients who were treated successfully. The two groups could not be differentiated with regard to anxiety and depression. Results are interpreted with regard to the prediction of treatment outcome.

Multidimensional evaluation of craniomandibular dysfunction. I: Symptoms and correlates.

To standardize clinical history taking, a comprehensive anamnestic questionnaire was developed (Screen). Screen includes questions about (i) pain, (ii) other symptoms of CMD, (iii) correlates of CMD, (iv) psychosocial factors, and (v) general health. Variables discriminating between subgroups of clinical cases and controls were described successively. This study was performed to assess whether subgroups of patients with signs and symptoms of craniomandibular dysfunction (CMD), and a control group of dental patients with and without signs and symptoms of CMD, can be characterized by differential report of signs and symptoms of CMD, as reported in Screen. Results indicate that Screen can be used to discriminate between (i) subgroups of subjects with signs or symptoms of CMD (both clinical cases and controls) and controls without signs or symptoms of CMD; (ii) subgroups of clinical cases and controls with signs and/or symptoms of CMD; and (iii) patients with CMD with mainly a myogenous component and patients with CMD with mainly an arthrogenous component. Differences between patients and controls are interpreted with regard to the correct classification of patients with CMD with mainly a myogenous component and patients with CMD with mainly an arthrogenous component, and with regard to the subjective treatment need for CMD. The results of logistic regression analyses indicate that subsets of items of Screen correctly classified up to 80% of patients with myogenous or arthrogenous CMD. Implications for further research were discussed.

Multidimensional evaluation of craniomandibular dysfunction. II: Pain assessment.

To standardize clinical history taking, a comprehensive anamnestic questionnaire was developed (Screen). Screen includes questions about: (i) pain, (ii) other symptoms of craniomandibular dysfunction (CMD), (iii) correlates of CMD, (iv) psychosocial factors, and (v) general health. The current study focuses on variables in Screen concerning pain reported somewhere in the head, neck and/or shoulders. This study was performed to assess whether subgroups of patients with signs and symptoms of CMD and a control group of dental patients with and without signs and symptoms of CMD can be characterized by differences in areas reported to be painful, in quantitative and qualitative characteristics of pain, and in factors exacerbating pain. Results indicate that several characteristics of pain as measured in Screen can be used to discriminate between: (i) subgroups of subjects with signs and/or symptoms of CMD and controls without signs or symptoms of CMD, (ii) subgroups of clinical cases and controls with signs or symptoms of CMD, and (iii) patients with CMD with mainly a myogenous component and patients with CMD with mainly an arthrogenous component. The results of logistic regression analysis indicate that four adverbs describing pain correctly classified 75% of patients with CMD-myo and patients with CMD-arthro. Differences between patients and controls are interpreted with regard to the correct classification of patients with CMD with a mainly myogenous component and patients with CMD with a mainly arthrogenous component and the subjective treatment need for CMD. Implications for further research are discussed.

Interexaminer reliability of six orthopaedic tests in diagnostic subgroups of craniomandibular disorders.

Interexaminer reliability is defined as the degree of consistency among examiners when making observations of the same clinical variable. In the present study, the interexaminer reliability of six orthopaedic tests was determined in a group of 79 patients with signs and/or symptoms of craniomadibular disorders (CMD), subdivided into three subgroups of patients with a mainly myogenous, a mainly arthrogenous, and a combined myogenous and arthrogenous disorder. Multi-test scores were composed for each test and combinations of tests for the three main symptoms of CMD, viz. pain, joint noises and restriction of movement. Although the orthopaedic tests showed different reliability scores, overall reliability of the determination of these three main symptoms of CMD was satisfactory. In the subgroups, arthrogenous signs and symptoms could be determined reliably with the set of six tests, whereas the reliability of the tests in determining pain and joint noises in the myogenous group was rather low. It may be concluded that the tests are well suited to evaluate arthrogenous signs and symptoms, but that the clinician should be aware of erroneous results of the tests in evaluating pain of a myogenous origin.

Diagnostic value of orthopedic tests in patients with temporomandibular disorders.

For a better definition of diagnostic subgroups of patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD), clinical orthopedic tests have been developed for the masticatory system, for use together with the commonly used active movement tests and palpation. In the present study, the characteristics and additional diagnostic value of four orthopedic tests--namely, passive opening, the joint play test, compression, and the static pain test--were determined for a patient group, diagnostic subgroups, and a control group. Significant differences among the scores of the tests in the different groups indicated that all six orthopedic tests contributed to the diagnostic process. Because of the close functional relationship of the masticatory system, most information was obtained when patients indicated where pain occurred during the different tests. Logistic regression techniques were used for determination of the relative diagnostic value of each orthopedic test in the diagnostic process. Active movement was the most powerful test for distinguishing the different subgroups. Palpation and passive opening were additionally useful for distinguishing between patients and control subjects and between the subgroups of arthrogenous and myogenous patients. Besides active movement, both compression and the joint play test played a minor role in the distinction of subgroups of arthrogenous patients. It may be concluded that in routine clinical practice, besides history taking and conventional radiography, a functional examination consisting of active movements, passive opening, and palpation provides valuable diagnostic information. In patients with a specific diagnostic problem, one of the other additional tests might be indicated.