Search

Background: The heterogeneity of persons with temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and the lack of effective treatments have called for a biopsychosocial model and the development of a more personalised treatment approach. Emphasis on phenotypes might be a beneficial approach. Objective: Identifying phenotypes among persons with TMD using potential prognostic factors, including personal characteristics and responses to clinical tests. Additionally, examining the distribution of TMD diagnoses within the identified phenotypes. Methods: A cross‐sectional study including 208 persons (85% females) seeking physiotherapy for problems in the temporomandibular area. All participants were examined clinically and answered questionnaires electronically. The phenotypes were identified using latent class analysis based on seven potential prognostic factors selected within pain, function and psychological domains. Table analysis was used to explore the distribution of TMD diagnoses within the identified phenotypes. Results: Most participants fit into one of three identified phenotypes. Phenotype 1 (32%) was characterised by functional disability, low psychosocial scores and low risk for developing chronicity and future work disability; Phenotype 2 (29%) by parafunctional habits, low psychosocial score and seeking treatment to reduce pain; and Phenotype 3 (39%) by high levels of mental distress, fear avoidance and a large risk of future work disability. Intra‐articular disorders dominated Phenotype 1, myalgia and TMD‐related headache Phenotype 2, while Phenotype 3 included all the different TMD diagnoses. Conclusion: The knowledge about the three identified phenotypes might be useful for clinicians treating persons with TMD and for the development of preventive strategies and more personalised treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The choice of approach for diagnosing temporomandibular joint ( TMJ) anterior disc displacement with reduction ( ADDR), viz. functional examination or TMJ imaging, is debatable and complicated by findings of low agreement between these approaches. Our aim was to investigate the validity of functional ADDR diagnostics using clinical examination and opto-electronic mandibular movement recordings versus magnetic resonance imaging ( MRI). 53 participants (32 women and 21 men, mean age ± s.d. of 28·7 ± 10·1 years) underwent a clinical examination, mandibular movement recording and MRI of their TMJs within 1 month. All were performed and analysed in a single-blind design by different experienced examiners for each technique. The sensitivity and specificity of each functional diagnostic method was calculated, with MRI as the gold standard. Anterior disc displacement with reduction was diagnosed in 27·6% of the TMJs clinically, in 15·2% using the movement recordings and in 44·8% on MRI. The specificity of the clinical examination for diagnosing ADDR was 81·0%, and of the movement recordings, 96·6%. The sensitivity was 38·3% and 29·8%, respectively. The chance of having a false-positive functional diagnosis of ADDR compared with MRI is low, and disagreement between the functional methods and MRI is mainly due to the high number of MRI diagnoses in asymptomatic subjects. In view of the fact that ADDR becomes clinically relevant only when it interferes with TMJ function, the functional diagnostic approach can be considered benchmark in ADDR recognition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present investigation was performed in a population of patients with temporomandibular disorders ( TMD), and it was designed to assess the correlation between self-reported questionnaire-based bruxism diagnosis and a diagnosis based on history taking plus clinical examination. One-hundred-fifty-nine patients with TMD underwent an assessment including a questionnaire investigating five bruxism-related items (i.e. sleep grinding, sleep grinding referral by bed partner, sleep clenching, awake clenching, awake grinding) and an interview (i.e. oral history taking with specific focus on bruxism habits) plus a clinical examination to evaluate bruxism signs and symptoms. The correlation between findings of the questionnaire, viz., patients' report, and findings of the interview/oral history taking plus clinical examination, viz., clinicians' diagnosis, was assessed by means of φ coefficient. The highest correlations were achieved for the sleep grinding referral item (φ = 0·932) and for the awake clenching item (φ = 0·811), whilst lower correlation values were found for the other items (φ values ranging from 0·363 to 0·641). The percentage of disagreement between the two diagnostic approaches ranged between 1·8% and 18·2%. Within the limits of the present investigation, it can be suggested that a strong positive correlation between a self-reported and a clinically based approach to bruxism diagnosis can be achieved as for awake clenching, whilst lower levels of correlation were detected for sleep-time activities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a well-defined clinical examination for diagnosing anterior disc displacement with and without reduction. A series of 40 patients with temporomandibular disorder (TMD) history were examined according to well-defined routine criteria. This examination included detailed history-taking, standardized clinical head and neck examination that included measurements of the range of motion, palpation of the temporomandibular joints and muscles of mastication for pain and auscultation of joint sounds. Magnetic resonance images of the joints were used as ‘gold standard’. Diagnostic accuracy of the clinical examination was 83% for determining normal disc–condyle relationship, 72% for diagnosing anterior disc displacement with reduction, and 81% for diagnosing anterior disc displacement without reduction. Our results suggest that anterior displacement of the disc can be diagnosed with considerable accuracy using a well-defined clinical examination only. Therefore, we conclude that not all patients with TMD symptoms require magnetic resonance imaging examination before treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]