The effectiveness of cervical rehabilitation interventions for pain in adults with myogenic temporomandibular disorders: A systematic review and meta‐analysis.

Objective: Little evidence exists for the most effective conservative treatment approach for adults with myogenic temporomandibular disorders (MTMD). We aim to assess the effectiveness of cervical rehabilitation interventions on pain intensity and sensitivity in adults with MTMD compared to comparison intervention such as placebo, sham treatment, education or no intervention. Methods: For this systematic review and meta‐analysis, we searched PubMed, EMBASE, Medline, PEDro databases, forward and backward citations and grey literature studies through PROSPERO, clinical trials and data registries without language or date restrictions between inception and 1 December 2021. We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) based on adult populations with MTMD who had a cervical rehabilitation intervention which was defined as any conservative intervention targeting the anatomical structures of the cervical spine. The primary outcome measures for pain were self‐reported pain intensity and pain sensitivity through the pressure pain threshold (PPT) of the masseter and temporalis muscles. Secondary outcome measures of maximal mouth opening (on MMO) were included. Included studies were assessed for bias with the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials. Evidence from RCTs was synthesised to determine treatment effect size as differences between standardised mean difference (SMD) for changes in pain intensity, PPT and MMO comparing adults with MTMD who were treated with cervical rehabilitation interventions compared to a control group. This study is registered on Prospero, number CRD 42021289299. Results: Our general search yielded 2647 studies where seven RCTs met eligibility criteria with low to some concerns in their risk of bias. Pain intensity (five studies, n = 223, SMD −0.98, 95% CI −1.67 to −0.28, I2 = 79%), PPT of the masseter muscle (six studies, n = 395, SMD 0.64, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.86, I2 = 90%) and the temporalis muscles (five studies, n = 295, SMD 0.76, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.45, I2 = 84%) showed large treatment effect estimates favouring cervical rehabilitation interventions compared to no treatment, sham cervical treatment, patient education or non‐cervical neuromuscular techniques. Compared to control interventions, one type of cervical rehabilitation intervention, cervical manual therapy alone or in combination with a neck exercise program was associated with statistically significant, large treatment effect estimates on pain intensity (four studies, n = 203, SMD −1.52, 95% CI −2.50 to −0.55). Conclusions: This review found that in the short‐term, cervical rehabilitation interventions especially upper cervical MT alone or in combination with a neck exercise program are effective in improving multiple pain outcomes in adults with MTMD. However, further research is needed to measure the long‐term effects of this type of intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]