Raul Elton Araújo Borges, Luana da Rocha Alves Mendonça, Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli da Costa Oliveira, Patrícia Dos Santos Calderon
{"title":"Development and Validation of the Epidemiological Diagnostic Instrument for Temporomandibular Disorders.","authors":"Raul Elton Araújo Borges, Luana da Rocha Alves Mendonça, Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli da Costa Oliveira, Patrícia Dos Santos Calderon","doi":"10.1111/joor.13853","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) are a highly misreported health problem. Its diagnosis is complex and requires the use of valid and reliable instruments.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To develop and validate the Epidemiological Diagnostic Instrument for TMD (EDI/TMD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Content validity (CV), response process (RP), construct validity (EFA), reliability (inter and intraobserver consistency), and convergence validity of the EDI/TMD were assessed and compared to the Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>An instrument composed of a 9-question questionnaire and a 12-step clinical protocol was developed. CV analysis reduced the instrument to a 5-question and 7-step clinical protocol (CVI = 0.93). Some instructions were included after the RP. The EFA found three factors: myogenous TMD, arthrogenous TMD, and differential diagnosis. The reliability scores ranged from substantial to excellent. When compared to the DC/TMD, the EDI/TMD total score indicated that this instrument is valid and provides satisfactory diagnostic criteria (Kappa = 0.906; p < 0.001), and can distinguish non-TMD and TMD individuals, with a cut-off point of 4.9 (Sensitivity = 1.0; Specificity = 1.0; AUC = 1.0). For individuals who had both myogenous and arthrogenous TMD, the cut-off point was 14 or higher (Sensitivity = 0.8; Specificity = 1.0; AUC = 0.987). For individuals who had either myogenous TMD (Sensitivity = 1.0; Specificity = 0.88; PPV = 0.89; NPV = 1.0) or arthrogenous TMD (Sensitivity = 0.95; Specificity = 0.87; PPV = 0.83; NPV = 0.96), the cut-off point was between 5 and 13.9, with the highest EFA score being the determinant factor for final diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on its psychometric properties, the EDI/TMD is a valid and reliable assessment tool that is capable of diagnosing TMD and classifying its subtypes.</p>","PeriodicalId":16605,"journal":{"name":"Journal of oral rehabilitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of oral rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.13853","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) are a highly misreported health problem. Its diagnosis is complex and requires the use of valid and reliable instruments.
Objective: To develop and validate the Epidemiological Diagnostic Instrument for TMD (EDI/TMD).
Methods: Content validity (CV), response process (RP), construct validity (EFA), reliability (inter and intraobserver consistency), and convergence validity of the EDI/TMD were assessed and compared to the Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD).
Results: An instrument composed of a 9-question questionnaire and a 12-step clinical protocol was developed. CV analysis reduced the instrument to a 5-question and 7-step clinical protocol (CVI = 0.93). Some instructions were included after the RP. The EFA found three factors: myogenous TMD, arthrogenous TMD, and differential diagnosis. The reliability scores ranged from substantial to excellent. When compared to the DC/TMD, the EDI/TMD total score indicated that this instrument is valid and provides satisfactory diagnostic criteria (Kappa = 0.906; p < 0.001), and can distinguish non-TMD and TMD individuals, with a cut-off point of 4.9 (Sensitivity = 1.0; Specificity = 1.0; AUC = 1.0). For individuals who had both myogenous and arthrogenous TMD, the cut-off point was 14 or higher (Sensitivity = 0.8; Specificity = 1.0; AUC = 0.987). For individuals who had either myogenous TMD (Sensitivity = 1.0; Specificity = 0.88; PPV = 0.89; NPV = 1.0) or arthrogenous TMD (Sensitivity = 0.95; Specificity = 0.87; PPV = 0.83; NPV = 0.96), the cut-off point was between 5 and 13.9, with the highest EFA score being the determinant factor for final diagnosis.
Conclusion: Based on its psychometric properties, the EDI/TMD is a valid and reliable assessment tool that is capable of diagnosing TMD and classifying its subtypes.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation aims to be the most prestigious journal of dental research within all aspects of oral rehabilitation and applied oral physiology. It covers all diagnostic and clinical management aspects necessary to re-establish a subjective and objective harmonious oral function.
Oral rehabilitation may become necessary as a result of developmental or acquired disturbances in the orofacial region, orofacial traumas, or a variety of dental and oral diseases (primarily dental caries and periodontal diseases) and orofacial pain conditions. As such, oral rehabilitation in the twenty-first century is a matter of skilful diagnosis and minimal, appropriate intervention, the nature of which is intimately linked to a profound knowledge of oral physiology, oral biology, and dental and oral pathology.
The scientific content of the journal therefore strives to reflect the best of evidence-based clinical dentistry. Modern clinical management should be based on solid scientific evidence gathered about diagnostic procedures and the properties and efficacy of the chosen intervention (e.g. material science, biological, toxicological, pharmacological or psychological aspects). The content of the journal also reflects documentation of the possible side-effects of rehabilitation, and includes prognostic perspectives of the treatment modalities chosen.