Craniofacial disorders and headaches. A narrative review.

OBJECTIVES: Craniofacial- and headache disorders are common co-morbid disorders. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the research discussing craniofacial pain, especially temporomandibular disorders, and its relationship and impact on headaches, as well as suggestions for diagnostic assessment tools and physical therapeutic management strategies. METHOD: A narrative structured review was performed. A search was conducted in MEDLINE using terms related to craniofacial pain and headaches. Additionally, papers regarding this topic were also extracted from the authors' personal libraries. Any study design (i.e., RCT, observational studies, systematic review, narrative review) that reported the concepts of interest was included, using Covidence. Results were narratively synthesized and described. RESULTS: From an epidemiological perspective, craniofacial pain and headaches are strongly related and often co-existing. This may be due to the neuroanatomical connection with the trigeminal cervical complex, or due to shared predisposing factors such as age, gender, and psychosocial factors. Pain drawings, questionnaires, and physical tests can be used to determine the cause of pain, as well as other perpetuating factors in patients with headaches and craniofacial pain. The evidence supports different forms of exercise and a combination of hands-on and hands-off strategies aimed at both the craniofacial pain as well as the headache. CONCLUSION: Headaches may be caused or aggravated by different disorders in the craniofacial region. Proper use of terminology and classification may help in understanding these complaints. Future research should look into the specific craniofacial areas and how headaches may arise from problems from those regions. (249 words).

Traumatic injury and multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

A systematic review/meta-analysis of literature addressing a possible association between traumatic injury and onset of multiple sclerosis was conducted. Medline, Embase, Cochrane DSR, Ovid HealthStar, CINAHL, ISI Web of Science and Scopus were searched for analytical studies from 1950 to 2011. Two investigators independently reviewed articles for inclusion, assessing their quality using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Of the 13 case-control studies included, 8 were moderate quality and 5 low; of the 3 cohort studies 2 were high and 1 moderate. Meta-analysis including moderate and low quality case-control studies produced a modest but significant odds ratio: 1.41 (95% confidence interval: 1.03, 1.93). However, when low quality studies were excluded, the resulting odds ratio was non-significant. Cohort studies produced a non-significant standardized incidence ratio of 1.00 (95% confidence interval: 0.86, 1.16). These findings support the conclusion that there is no association between traumatic injury and multiple sclerosis onset; more high quality cohort studies would help to confirm this observation.

Effectiveness of knowledge translation interventions to improve cancer pain management.

CONTEXT: Cancer pain is prevalent, yet patients do not receive best care despite widely available evidence. Although national cancer control policies call for education, effectiveness of such programs is unclear and best practices are not well defined. OBJECTIVES: To examine existing evidence on whether knowledge translation (KT) interventions targeting health care providers, patients, and caregivers improve cancer pain outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were undertaken to evaluate primary studies that examined effects of KT interventions on providers and patients. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. Five studies reported interventions targeting health care providers, four focused on patients or their families, one study examined patients and their significant others, and 16 studies examined patients only. Seven quantitative comparisons measured the statistical effects of interventions. A significant difference favoring the treatment group in least pain intensity (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44, 1.42) and in usual pain/average pain (95% CI: 0.13, 0.74) was observed. No other statistical differences were observed. However, most studies were assessed as having high risk of bias and failed to report sufficient information about the intervention dose, quality of educational material, fidelity, and other key factors required to evaluate effectiveness of intervention design. CONCLUSION: Trials that used a higher dose of KT intervention (characterized by extensive follow-up, comprehensive educational program, and higher resource allocation) were significantly more likely to have positive results than trials that did not use this approach. Further attention to methodological issues to improve educational interventions and research to clarify factors that lead to better pain control are urgently needed.

Scales to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is commonly evaluated in order to assess the risk of biased estimates of treatment effects. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify scales used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs in health care research and summarize the content, construction, development, and psychometric properties of these scales. METHODS: Extensive electronic database searches, along with a manual search, were performed. RESULTS: One hundred five relevant studies were identified. They accounted for 21 scales and their modifications. The majority of scales had not been rigorously developed or tested for validity and reliability. The Jadad Scale presented the best validity and reliability evidence; however, its validity for physical therapy trials has not been supported. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Many scales are used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs, but most of these scales have not been adequately developed and have not been adequately tested for validity and reliability. A valid and reliable scale for the assessment of the methodological quality of physical therapy trials needs to be developed.

The association between head and cervical posture and temporomandibular disorders: a systematic review.

AIMS: To carry out a systematic review to assess the evidence concerning the association between head and cervical posture and temporomandibular disorders (TMD). METHODS: A search of Medline, Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Lilacs, and Cochrane Library databases was conducted in all languages with the help of a health sciences librarian. Key words used in the search were posture, head posture, cervical spine or neck, vertebrae, cervical lordosis, craniomandibular disorders or temporomandibular disorders, temporomandibular disorders, and orofacial pain or facial pain. Abstracts which appeared to fulfill the initial selection criteria were selected by consensus. The original articles were retrieved and evaluated to ensure they met the inclusion criteria. A methodological checklist was used to evaluate the quality of the selected articles and their references were hand-searched for possible missing articles. RESULTS: Twelve studies met all inclusion criteria and were analyzed in detail for their methodology and information quality. Nine articles that analyzed the association between head posture and TMD included patients with mixed TMD diagnosis; 1 article differentiated among muscular, articular, and mixed symptomatology; and 3 articles analyzed information from patients with only articular problems. Finally, 2 studies evaluated the association between head posture and TMD in patients with muscular TMD. Several methodological defects were noted in the 12 studies. CONCLUSION: Since most of the studies included in this systematic review were of poor methodological quality, the findings of the studies should be interpreted with caution. The association between intra-articular and muscular TMD and head and cervical posture is still unclear, and better controlled studies with comprehensive TMD diagnoses, greater sample sizes, and objective posture evaluation are necessary.

Electromyographic assessment of the activity of the masticatory using the agonist contract-antagonist relax technique (AC) and contract-relax technique (CR).

Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF) techniques are a group of therapeutic procedures that may be used to cause relaxation of muscles. Studies have found controversial results when applying these techniques. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness of masticatory muscle relaxation through the use of the contract-relax technique (CR) when compared with the agonist contract-antagonist relax technique (AC). A convenience sample of 30 students was recruited for this study. The CR and the AC techniques were applied to the subjects in order to cause relaxation of the masticatory muscles. Electromyography activity of all muscles was registered. Two way ANOVA with repeated measures analysis demonstrated that both the AC technique and the CR technique did not decrease the EMG activity of masticatory muscles (P>0.05). Instead, both techniques caused an increase in electromyographic activity of the masticatory muscles. Based on the results obtained from this study, both the CR and the AC techniques were not effective in causing relaxation of the masticatory muscles. The purported physiological mechanisms of PNF techniques, which stated that they act through reciprocal inhibition and autogenic inhibition causing muscular relaxation, are not supported by this study.