Total for the last 12 months
number of access : ?
number of downloads : ?
ID 117804
Author
Ooi, Kazuhiro Kanazawa University
Aihara, Morio Aihara Clinic
Matsumura, Hidehisa Matsumura Dental Clinic|Kyushu University
Matsuda, Shinpei University of Fukui
Watanabe, Yuki Showa University
Yuasa, Hidemichi Toyohashi Medical Center
Content Type
Journal Article
Description
Objectives
Therapy outcome measures (TOMs) in temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) have not been systematically evaluated. We systematically explored the main TOM assessment methods for TMD TOMs used in previous studies.
Design
Scoping review.
Data sources
According to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Review reporting guidelines, we systematically searched five key databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Epistemonikos and ClinicalTrials) and thoroughly scanned relevant grey literature using Medical Subject Headings, Emtree and index terms.
Eligibility criteria
We considered primary research papers published from January 2010 to December 2020 that included patients with TMD aged ≥18 years, diagnosed according to the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders.
Data extraction and synthesis
Four reviewers extracted general information and information on study design and setting, target, interventions, and outcome type.
Results
One hundred and seventy-two of the 3726 screened articles (3704 by search engines and 22 manually) were included. The TOMs analysed included pain (n=161 articles), maximal mouth opening (MMO) (91), jaw function (32), jaw movement (26), joint sound (16), quality of life (QOL) (15), depression/anxiety (14), oral QOL (10) or others (30). Evaluation periods were <4 weeks (111), <8 weeks (62), <12 weeks (59), >12 weeks (75) or ‘not mentioned’ (12). Pain outcomes (229) included general pain (115), tenderness (45), pain during functioning (44), resting pain (16) and others (8). Pain outcome evaluation methods included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; 121), Numerical Rating Scale (21) and other methods (21). Pain outcome indicators were binary (10) or continuous (158); only five studies reported the least significant difference in treatment efficacy. MMO evaluation using painless methods (19) and jaw function evaluation using methods assessing mandibular movement range (23) were the most frequent.
Conclusions
TMD TOMs are diverse; the major outcomes were pain, MMO, jaw function and jaw movement. Most pain outcomes are evaluated by VAS Score changes.
Journal Title
BMJ Open
ISSN
20446055
Publisher
BMJ Publishing Group
Volume
12
Issue
8
Start Page
e061387
Published Date
2022-08-19
Rights
This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
EDB ID
DOI (Published Version)
URL ( Publisher's Version )
FullText File
language
eng
TextVersion
Publisher
departments
Oral Sciences