Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache最新文献

Aims: To assess differences in biopsychosocial factors between participants with masticatory myofascial pain with referral (MFPwR), with myalgia without referral (Mw/oR), and community controls without TMDs.

Methods: Study participants were diagnosed with MFPwR (n = 196), Mw/oR (n = 299), or as a non-TMD community control (n = 87) by two calibrated examiners at each of three study sites. Pain chronicity, pain on palpation of masticatory muscle sites, and pressure pain thresholds (PPT) at 12 masticatory muscle, 2 trigeminal, and 2 nontrigeminal control sites were recorded. Psychosocial factors assessed included anxiety, depression, and nonspecific physical symptoms (Symptom Checklist-90 Revised); stress (Perceived Stress Scale); and health-related quality of life (Short Form Health Survey). Comparisons among the three groups were adjusted for age, sex, race, education, and income using multivariable linear regression. The significance threshold was set at P = .017 (.05 / 3) for subsequent pairwise comparisons.

Results: Compared to the Mw/oR group, the MFPwR group had significantly greater pain chronicity, number of painful muscle sites, anxiety, depression, nonspecific physical symptoms, and impaired physical health (P < .017). The MFPwR group also had significantly lower PPTs for masticatory sites (P < .017). Both muscle pain groups differed significantly from the non-TMD community control group for all outcome measures (P < .017).

Conclusion: These findings support the clinical utility of separating MFPwR from Mw/oR. Patients with MFPwR are more complex from a biopsychosocial perspective than Mw/oR patients, which likely affects prognosis and supports consideration of these factors in case management.

Aims: To systematically review the literature assessing associations between TMDs and primary headaches.

Methods: Using validated clinical criteria, studies on TMDs and primary headaches published up to January 10, 2023 were identified using six electronic databases. This review adhered to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines and 27-item checklist and is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021256391). Risk of bias was evaluated using the National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Toolkits for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies.

Results: Two independent investigators rated 7,697 records against the primary endpoint and found 8 records meeting the eligibility requirements. Migraine was found to be the most common primary headache related to TMDs (61.5%), followed by episodic tension-type headache (ETTH; 38.5%). A moderate association was found for mixed TMDs with migraine and ETTH, with a large sample size and multiple studies included (n = 8). A very low-quality association was found for myalgia-related TMDs with migraine and ETTH (included studies, n = 2).

Conclusion: The association between TMDs and primary headaches is of great interest given the possible effectiveness of TMD management in reducing headache intensity/frequency in patients with TMDs and headache comorbidity. A moderate association was found for mixed TMDs with primary headaches, in particular migraine and ETTH. However, owing to the overall moderate certainty of evidence of the present findings, further longitudinal studies with larger samples investigating possible associated factors and using accurate TMD and headache category assignment are needed.

Aims: To describe how some management practices in the field of orofacial musculoskeletal disorders (also described as temporomandibular disorders [TMDs]) are based on concepts about occlusal relationships, condyle positions, or functional guidance; for some patients, these procedures may be producing successful outcomes in terms of symptom reduction, but in many cases, they can be examples of unnecessary overtreatment.

Methods: The authors discuss the negative consequences of this type of overtreatment for both doctors and patients, as well as the impact on the dental profession itself. Special focus is given to trying to move the dental profession away from the old mechanical paradigms for treating TMDs and forward to the more modern (and generally more conservative) medically based approaches, with emphasis on the biopsychosocial model.

Results: The clinical implications of such a discussion are apparent. For example, it can be argued that the routine use of Phase II dental or surgical treatments for managing most orofacial pain cases represents overtreatment, which cannot be defended on the grounds of symptom improvement (ie, "successful" outcomes) alone. Similarly, there is enough clinical evidence to conclude that complex biomechanical approaches focusing on the search for an ideal specific condylar or neuromuscular position for the management of orofacial musculoskeletal disorders are not needed to produce a positive clinical result that is stable over time.

Conclusion: Typically, overtreatment successes cannot be easily perceived by the patients or the treating dentists because the patients are satisfied and the dentists feel good about those outcomes. However, neither party knows whether an excessive amount of treatment has been provided. Therefore, both the practical and ethical aspects of this discussion about proper treatment vs overtreatment deserve attention.

Aims: To measure brain activity in patients with bruxism and temporomandibular disorder (TMD)-related pain in comparison to controls using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and to investigate whether modulations in jaw clenching led to different pain reports and/or changes in neural activity in motor and pain processing areas within and between both groups.

Methods: A total of 40 participants (21 patients with bruxism and TMD-related pain and 19 healthy controls) performed a tooth-clenching task while lying inside a 3T MRI scanner. Participants were instructed to mildly or strongly clench their teeth for brief periods of 12 seconds and to subsequently rate their clenching intensity and pain experience after each clenching period.

Results: Patients reported significantly more pain during strong clenching compared to mild clenching. Further results showed significant differences between patients and controls in activity in areas of brain networks commonly associated with pain processing, which were also correlated with reported pain intensity. There was no evidence for differences in activity in motor-related areas between groups, which contrasts with findings of previous research.

Conclusions: Brain activity in patients with bruxism and TMD-related pain is correlated more with pain processing than with motoric differences.

No summary.

Aims: To determine differences between TMD subtypes in terms of clinical characteristics, dizziness, tinnitus, and ear fullness according to the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) and to investigate the clinical conditions associated with dizziness, tinnitus, and ear fullness. Methods: Participants having TMDs aged 18 to 45 years were included in this study. They were classified and divided into three groups according to the DC/TMD Axis I criteria: group 1 = pain-related TMDs and headache; group 2 = intra-articular joint disorders; and group 3 = degenerative joint disease. Demographic data and dizziness, tinnitus, and ear fullness were assessed. Maximum mouth opening, opening/closing click, lateral click, fine/coarse crepitation, bruxism, and presence of pain were evaluated by physical examination. Results: A total of 129 participants were included: 68 (52.7%) in group 1, 40 (31%) in group 2, and 21 (16.3%) in group 3. In the comparison of all three diagnostic groups, there was a significant difference only in educational level (P = .013). The presence of dizziness, tinnitus, or ear fullness was not found to be significantly different among the three groups. When all participants were divided into two groups according to the presence of dizziness, low education levels (P = .007), being married (P = .040), presence of pain (P = .002), tinnitus (P = .008), ear fullness (P = .017), and presence of thin crepitation (P = .015) were related to having dizziness symptoms. In addition, patients with ear fullness (P = .042), dizziness (P = .008), and female sex (P = .008) reported more tinnitus. Conclusion: TMD subtype was not associated with dizziness, tinnitus, or ear fullness. Painful conditions were associated with dizziness in participants with TMDs.

Aims: To assess the differential item functioning (DIF) of the Jaw Functional Limitation Scale (JFLS) due to gender, age, and language (English vs Spanish).

Methods: JFLS data were collected from a consecutive sample of 2,115 adult dental patients from HealthPartners dental clinics in Minnesota. Participants with missing data were excluded, and analyses were performed using data from 1,678 participants. Whether the item response theory (IRT) model assumptions of essential unidimensionality and local independence held up for the JFLS was examined. Then, using Samejima's graded response model, the IRT log-likelihood ratio approach was used to detect DIF. The magnitude and impact of DIF based on Raju's noncompensatory DIF (NCDIF) cutoff value of 0.096, Cohen's effect sizes, and test (or scale) characteristic curves were also assessed.

Results: Essential unidimensionality was confirmed, but locally dependent items were found on the JFLS. A few items were flagged with statistically significant DIF after adjustment for multiple comparisons. The NCDIF indices associated with all DIF items were < 0.096, and they had small effect sizes of ≤ 0.2. The differences between the expected scores shown in the test characteristic curves were little to none.

Conclusion: The present results support the use of the JFLS summary score to obtain psychometrically robust score comparisons across English- and Spanish-speaking, male and female, and younger and older dental patients. Overall, the magnitude of DIF was relatively small, and the practical impact minimal.

Aims: To present a review of the mechanisms of action, available clinical data, and safety profiles of novel migraine therapeutics to inform practice. Methods: PubMed, Medline, and Google Scholar were searched for randomized controlled trials (24 publications), review articles (15 publications), and other pertinent literature (16 publications) discussing the novel migraine therapeutics available between the years 2010 and 2021. All publications were reviewed to assess the mechanism of action, relevant clinical data, and side effect profile for each novel treatment. Therapeutic gain was also recorded in studies that included a placebo arm. Results: A total of 55 studies were included in the final analysis. In the preventive treatment of migraine, novel medications target calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) and fall into either the monoclonal anti-CGRP or gepant class. For the acute treatment of migraine, novel medications fall into either the ditan or gepant class. Several medical devices have been developed for the acute and preventive treatment of migraine. Conclusion: Novel therapeutics are available for both the prevention and acute treatment of migraine headaches. These new medications and neuromodulatory devices appear overall to be safe and effective in the management of migraine headaches.

Aims: To systematically review the qualitative evidence related to experiences of patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and to explore their journeys within health care services. Methods: A systematic search of the following databases was conducted: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL Complete, and the Cochrane database. Thematic synthesis was used to analyze and synthesize the data from qualitative studies that explored the journeys of TMD patients within health care services. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool was used to critically appraise the quality of the included studies. Results: The search strategies yielded 4,563 articles across all databases, and 18 articles were eventually included. Six themes were derived: care-seeking attitudes; expectations and health care experience; the patient-clinician interaction; diagnosis as a stepping stone for improvement; management; and social support. Conclusion: The journey within health care services may play a valuable role in the ability to cope with chronic TMDs. Receiving a diagnosis, being listened to, and being believed are among the most important elements making for a positive clinical experience.

Aims: To determine sleep quality and associated factors in a group of patients with painful TMDs. Methods: The medical records of 80 patients with arthralgia and/or myofascial pain were reviewed and compared to a healthy control group. Data about sex, age, subjective pain, physical activity, social activity, subjective sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index [PSQI]), pain vigilance (Pain Vigilance and Awareness Questionnaire [PVAQ]), and pain catastrophizing (Pain Catastrophizing Scale [PCS]) were collected. Relationships between PSQI, age, pain intensity, PVAQ, and PCS in the TMD group were also analyzed. Data from the control group were used to transform the PSQI results into T-scores, which were then used to divide the TMD group into two subgroups: normal and impaired sleep. Results: TMD patients presented a significantly higher (P < .001) PSQI score than the control group. Also, in the TMD group, there was a low to moderate correlation between PSQI and pain intensity and a significant correlation between PVAQ and PCS. The impaired sleep group presented a significantly higher (P < .001) PSQI T-score than the normal sleep group. Univariate analysis showed that subjective pain, social activity, and the PCS total and subscale scores differed significantly between the different PSQI T-score groups. The comparison between TMD pain patients and control subjects showed a significantly higher prevalence of T-score discordance in almost all PSQI components in TMD patients with impaired sleep. Conclusion: Subjective sleep quality in painful TMD patients could be associated with and influenced by psychosocial factors (catastrophizing and hypervigilance), social activity, and pain intensity.