Efficacy of an email‐based recording and reminding system for limiting daytime non‐functional tooth contact in patients with temporomandibular disorders: A randomized controlled trial

Manual therapy and dry needling improve mobility, pain and reduce fear of COVID-19 in temporomandibular disorder patients: Randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated pain and joint mobility outcomes in patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD), being that effective treatments are of clinical interest. We aimed to evaluate the effects of manual therapy (MT) and dry needling (DN), compared to cognitive-behavioral therapy/control (CO), on pain, articular mobility, and fear of COVID-19 in patients with TMD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty participants with myofascial TMD were randomly assigned to three groups: MT, DN, and CO. Participants received four weeks of treatment (30 min per week). The participants completed the Fear of COVID- 19 Scale, the Visual Analog Scale, and mandibular mobility was assessed. Data were collected before the intervention (T1), after the last treatment session (T2), and 30 days after the end of treatment (T3). The data were analyzed using two-way Mixed-Design ANOVA, considering the group effect (DN x MT x CO), time (T1, T2, and T3), and the interaction time × group in the observed variance of outcomes.

RESULTS

We observed an interaction effect of time × group for maximum mouth opening, protrusion, and pain. The maximum mouth opening increased in the DN and MT groups (p = 0.005), while protrusion increased in the DN group (p = 0.007; test power = 97%, large effect size). A decrease in pain scores over time was observed in the DN and MT groups (p < 0.001; test power>99%, large effect size). The fear of COVID-19 score decreased in the DN and MT groups after 30 days (p = 0.033).

CONCLUSION

DN and MT improve pain, joint mobility, and fear of COVID-19 in patients with TMD.

Psychological treatments for temporomandibular disorder pain-A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) are common. They affect abilities for carrying out daily tasks and influence different psychological aspects. In addition to standard treatment, psychological treatments have been suggested. The aim was to investigate the effects of psychological treatments on patients with painful TMD in a short- and long-term perspective.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search was conducted in the databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting psychological interventions for TMD. Registered beforehand in PROSPERO (CRD42022320106). In total, 18 RCTs were included; six RCTs that could be used in the meta-analysis, and all 18 RCTs were used in the narrative synthesis. Risk of bias was assessed by the Cochrane's tool for assessing risk of bias and certainty of evidence by GRADE.

RESULTS

The narrative synthesis indicates that psychological treatment options seem equivalent to standard treatment for painful TMD. The meta-analysis showed that a combination of psychological treatment and standard treatment and manual treatment (very low-quality evidence) are significantly better in pain reduction than just counselling and standard treatments of TMD.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that psychological treatments seem to reduce pain intensity in individuals with painful TMD, and that the effect seems to be equally good as standard treatment. However, a combination of psychological treatments and standard treatments seems to have an even better effect. This indicates that psychological treatments are promising as an additional treatment approach for painful TMDs.

Analysis of the Use of Sample Size and Effect Size Calculations in a Temporomandibular Disorders Randomised Controlled Trial-Short Narrative Review

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Temporomandibular disorder (TMD) is the term used to describe a pathology (dysfunction and pain) in the masticatory muscles and temporomandibular joint (TMJ). There is an apparent upward trend in the publication of dental research and a need to continually improve the quality of research. Therefore, this study was conducted to analyse the use of sample size and effect size calculations in a TMD randomised controlled trial.

METHODS

The period was restricted to the full 5 years, i.e., papers published in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023. The filter article type-"Randomized Controlled Trial" was used. The studies were graded on a two-level scale: 0-1. In the case of 1, sample size (SS) and effect size (ES) were calculated.

RESULTS

In the entire study sample, SS was used in 58% of studies, while ES was used in 15% of studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Quality should improve as research increases. One factor that influences quality is the level of statistics. SS and ES calculations provide a basis for understanding the results obtained by the authors. Access to formulas, online calculators and software facilitates these analyses. High-quality trials provide a solid foundation for medical progress, fostering the development of personalized therapies that provide more precise and effective treatment and increase patients' chances of recovery. Improving the quality of TMD research, and medical research in general, helps to increase public confidence in medical advances and raises the standard of patient care.

Wearables for personalized monitoring of masticatory muscle activity - opportunities, challenges, and the future

Wearable devices are worn on or remain in close proximity of the human body. The use of wearable devices specific to the orofacial region is steadily increasing. Orofacial applications of wearable devices include supplementing diagnosis, tracking treatment progress, monitoring patient compliance, and understanding oral parafunctional behaviours. In this short communication, the role of wearable devices in advancing personalized dental medicine are highlighted with a specific focus on masticatory muscle activity monitoring in naturalistic settings. Additionally, challenges, opportunities, as well as future research areas for successful use of wearable devices for precise, personalized care of muscle disorders are discussed.

Psychological therapies for temporomandibular disorders (TMDs)

BACKGROUND

Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) are a group of musculoskeletal disorders affecting the jaw. They are frequently associated with pain that can be difficult to manage and may become persistent (chronic). Psychological therapies aim to support people with TMDs to manage their pain, leading to reduced pain, disability and distress.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of psychological therapies in people (aged 12 years and over) with painful TMD lasting 3 months or longer.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched six bibliographic databases up to 21 October 2021 and used additional search methods to identify published, unpublished and ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of any psychological therapy (e.g. cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), behaviour therapy (BT), acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), mindfulness) for the management of painful TMD. We compared these against control or alternative treatment (e.g. oral appliance, medication, physiotherapy).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We reported outcome data immediately after treatment and at the longest available follow-up. We used the Cochrane RoB 1 tool to assess the risk of bias in included studies. Two review authors independently assessed each included study for any risk of bias in sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding of outcome assessors, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting of outcomes, and other issues. We judged the certainty of the evidence for each key comparison and outcome as high, moderate, low or very low according to GRADE criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 22 RCTs (2001 participants), carried out between 1967 and 2021. We were able to include 12 of these studies in meta-analyses. The risk of bias was high across studies, and we judged the certainty of the evidence to be low to very low overall; further research may change the findings. Our key outcomes of interest were: pain intensity, disability caused by pain, adverse events and psychological distress. Treatments varied in length, with the shortest being 4 weeks. The follow-up time ranged from 3 months to 12 months. Most studies evaluated CBT.   At treatment completion, there was no evidence of a benefit of CBT on pain intensity when measured against alternative treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.03, confidence interval (CI) -0.21 to 0.28; P = 0.79; 5 studies, 509 participants) or control (SMD -0.09, CI -0.30 to 0.12; P = 0.41; 6 studies, 577 participants). At follow-up, there was evidence of a small benefit of CBT for reducing pain intensity compared to alternative treatment (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.08; 5 studies, 475 participants) and control (SMD -0.30, CI -0.51 to -0.09; 6 studies, 639 participants). At treatment completion, there was no evidence of a difference in disability outcomes (interference in activities caused by pain) between CBT and alternative treatment (SMD 0.15, CI -0.40 to 0.10; P = 0.25; 3 studies, 245 participants), or between CBT and control/usual care (SMD 0.02, CI -0.21 to 0.24; P = 0.88; 3 studies, 315 participants). Nor was there evidence of a difference at follow-up (CBT versus alternative treatment: SMD -0.15, CI -0.42 to 0.12; 3 studies, 245 participants; CBT versus control: SMD 0.01 CI - 0.61 to 0.64; 2 studies, 240 participants). There were very few data on adverse events. From the data available, adverse effects associated with psychological treatment tended to be minor and to occur less often than in alternative treatment groups. There were, however, insufficient data available to draw firm conclusions. CBT showed a small benefit in terms of reducing psychological distress at treatment completion compared to alternative treatment (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.15; 6 studies, 553 participants), which was maintained at follow-up (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.51 to -0.13; 6 studies, 516 participants). For CBT versus control, only one study reported results for distress and did not find evidence of a difference between groups at treatment completion (mean difference (MD) 2.36, 95% CI -1.17 to 5.89; 101 participants) or follow-up (MD -1.02, 95% CI -4.02 to 1.98; 101 participants). We assessed the certainty of the evidence to be low or very low for all comparisons and outcomes. The data were insufficient to draw any reliable conclusions about psychological therapies other than CBT.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found mixed evidence for the effects of psychological therapies on painful temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). There is low-certainty evidence that CBT may reduce pain intensity more than alternative treatments or control when measured at longest follow-up,  but not at treatment completion. There is low-certainty evidence that CBT may be better than alternative treatments, but not control, for reducing psychological distress at treatment completion and follow-up. There is low-certainty evidence that CBT may not be better than other treatments or control for pain disability outcomes.  There is insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about alternative psychological therapeutic approaches, and there are insufficient data to be clear about adverse effects that may be associated with psychological therapies for painful TMD.  Overall, we found insufficient evidence on which to base a reliable judgement about the efficacy of psychological therapies for painful TMD. Further research is needed to determine whether or not psychological therapies are effective, the most effective type of therapy and delivery method, and how it can best be targeted. In particular, high-quality RCTs conducted in primary care and community settings are required, which evaluate a range of psychological approaches against alternative treatments or usual care, involve both adults and adolescents, and collect measures of pain intensity, pain disability and psychological distress until at least 12 months post-treatment.

Smartphone-based evaluation of awake bruxism behaviours in a sample of healthy young adults: findings from two University centres

A smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment (EMA) strategy was used to assess the frequency of awake bruxism behaviours, based on the report of five oral conditions (ie relaxed jaw muscles, teeth contact, mandible bracing, teeth clenching and teeth grinding). One hundred and fifty-three (N = 153) healthy young adults (mean ± SD age = 22.9 ± 3.2 years), recruited in two different Italian Universities, used a dedicated smartphone application that sent 20 alerts/day at random times for seven days. Upon alert receipt, the subjects had to report in real-time one of the above five possible oral conditions. Individual data were used to calculate an average frequency of the study population for each day. For each condition, a coefficient of variation (CV) of frequency data was calculated as the ratio between SD and mean values over the seven recording days. Average frequency of the different behaviours over the seven days was as follows: relaxed jaw muscle, 76.4%; teeth contact, 13.6%; mandible bracing, 7.0%; teeth clenching, 2.5%; and teeth grinding, 0.5%. No significant differences were found in frequency data between the two University samples. The relaxed jaw muscles condition was more frequent in males (80.7 ± 17.7) than in females (73.4 ± 22.2). The frequency of relaxed jaw muscles condition over the period of observation had a very low coefficient of variation (0.27), while for the different awake bruxism behaviours, CV was in a range between 1.5 (teeth contact) and 4.3 (teeth grinding). Teeth contact was the most prevalent behaviour (57.5-69.7). Findings from this investigation suggest that the average frequency of AB behaviours over one week, investigated using EMA-approach, is around 23.6%.