Short-term treatment of a resilient appliance in TMD pain patients: a randomized controlled trial.

To investigate the short-term efficacy of a resilient appliance in patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD) suffering from pain, a randomized, controlled trial was performed in 80 recruited TMD pain patients. They were randomly allocated to one of two groups: treatment with a resilient appliance or treatment with a hard, palatal, non-occluding appliance. The primary treatment outcome measure was judged positive when patients' TMD pain at worst, according to the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), decreased by at least 30%. One additional treatment outcome was reduction of characteristic pain intensity. Number needed to treat was measured on the basis of primary treatment outcome at 10 weeks. At baseline, patient characteristics and TMD pain did not differ between the groups. There were no significant differences between groups regarding a 30% reduction in VAS-reported TMD pain at worst at 10 weeks' follow-up; 61% in the treatment group and 46% in the control group. After 6 and 10 weeks of treatment, CPI decreased in both groups. Number needed to treat was 9.1 for both the resilient and the control appliance therapy during 10 weeks. There was no statistically significant difference between the resilient appliance and the non-occluding control appliance in reducing TMD pain from a short-term perspective.

Clinical diagnoses and MRI findings in patients with TMD pain.

The aim of this study was to compare the findings on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in temporomandibular disorders (TMD) pain patients with clinical diagnoses of myofascial pain or arthralgia/osteoarthritis in combination with myofascial pain according to the Research Diagnostic Criteria for TMD. The temporomandibular joints of 60 consecutive patients, 19 with myofascial pain and 41 patients with arthralgia/osteoarthritis in combination with myofascial pain were examined clinically and with MRI. Overall the most common MRI findings were different kinds of disc displacements and structural bone changes, which were found in both pain groups. However, disc displacements were found significantly (P=0.002) more often in the group arthralgia/osteoarthritis in combination with myofascial pain. One hundred and four joints were found to have no clinical diagnosis of disc displacements, but 64 of these joints had findings of disc displacements on MRI. Joint fluid was found in both pain groups. Patients having a combination of disc displacement and joint fluid were significantly (P=0.047) more common in the pain group arthralgia/osteoarthritis in combination with myofascial pain. In conclusion, the MRI findings of different kinds of disc displacement and structural bone changes were common in TMD patients. The clinical diagnoses for subdivision into myogenous only or combined arthrogenous and myogenous pain groups were not confirmed by MRI.