Ephraim Winocur

Research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders: a systematic review of axis I epidemiologic findings.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to summarize and systematically review the literature on the prevalence of different research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (RDC/TMD) version 1.0 axis I diagnoses in patient and in the general populations. STUDY DESIGN For each of the relevant papers, the following data/information were recorded for meta-analysis and discussion: sample size and demographic features (mean age, female-to-male ratio); prevalence of the assigned diagnoses; prevalence of the diagnoses assigned to the left and right joints, if available; prevalence of the diagnoses assigned to the 2 genders, if available; prevalence of the different combinations of multiple diagnoses, if available; and prevalence of TMD (only for community studies). RESULTS Twenty-one (n = 21) papers were included in the review (15 dealing with TMD patient populations and 6 with community samples). The studies on TMD patients accounted for a total of 3,463 subjects (mean age 30.2-39.4 years, female-to-male ratio 3.3), with overall prevalences of 45.3% for group I muscle disorder diagnoses, 41.1% for group II disc displacements, and 30.1% for group III joint disorders. Studies on general populations accounted for a total of 2,491 subjects, with an overall 9.7% prevalence for group I, 11.4% for group IIa, and 2.6% for group IIIa diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS Prevalence reports were highly variable across studies. Myofascial pain with or without mouth opening limitation was the commonest diagnosis in TMD patient populations, and disc displacement with reduction was the commonest diagnosis in community samples.

Epidemiology of bruxism in adults: a systematic review of the literature

AIMS To investigate the association among temporomandibular disorders (TMD), sleep bruxism, and primary headaches, assessing the risk of occurrence of primary headaches in patients with or without painful TMD and sleep bruxism. METHODS The sample consisted of 301 individuals (253 women and 48 men) with ages varying from 18 to 76 years old (average age of 37.5 years). The Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders were used to classify TMD. Sleep bruxism was diagnosed by clinical criteria proposed by the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, and primary headaches were diagnosed according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders-II. Data were analyzed by chi-square and odds ratio tests with a 95% confidence interval, and the significance level adopted was .05. RESULTS An association was found among painful TMD, migraine, and tension-type headache (P < .01). The magnitude of association was higher for chronic migraine (odds ratio = 95.9; 95% confidence intervals = 12.51-734.64), followed by episodic migraine (7.0; 3.45-14.22) and episodic tension-type headache (3.7; 1.59-8.75). With regard to sleep bruxism, the association was significant only for chronic migraine (3.8; 1.83-7.84). When the sample was stratified by the presence of sleep bruxism and painful TMD, only the presence of sleep bruxism did not increase the risk for any type of headache. The presence of painful TMD without sleep bruxism significantly increased the risk in particular for chronic migraine (30.1; 3.58-252.81), followed by episodic migraine (3.7; 1.46-9.16). The association between painful TMD and sleep bruxism significantly increased the risk for chronic migraine (87.1; 10.79-702.18), followed by episodic migraine (6.7; 2.79-15.98) and episodic tension-type headache (3.8; 1.38-10.69). CONCLUSION The association of sleep bruxism and painful TMD greatly increased the risk for episodic migraine, episodic tension-type headache, and especially for chronic migraine.

Psychosocial impairment in temporomandibular disorders patients. RDC/TMD axis II findings from a multicentre study

OBJECTIVES The relationship between the rate of chronic pain-related disability and depression and somatization levels as well as the influence of pain duration on Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) axis II findings were assessed in a three centre investigation. METHODS The study sample (N=1149; F:M 4.1:1, m.a. 38.6 years) consisted of patients seeking for TMD treatment and undergoing RDC/TMD axis II psychosocial assessment to be rated in chronic pain-related disability (Graded Chronic Pain Scale, GCPS), depression (Symptoms Checklist-90[SCL-90] scale for depression, DEP) and somatization levels (SCL-90 scale for non-specific physical symptoms, SOM). The null hypotheses to be tested were that (1) no correlation existed between GCPS categories and DEP and SOM scores, and (2) no differences emerged between patients with pain from more or less than 6 months as for the prevalence of the different degrees of pain-related impairment, depression, and somatization. RESULTS In the overall sample, the prevalence of high pain-related disability (GCPS grades III or IV), severe depression and somatization was 16.9%, 21.4%, and 28.5%, respectively. A correlation was shown between GCPS and both DEP and SOM categories (Spearmans correlation test, p<0.001). A significant association between pain lasting from more than 6 months and high GCPS scores was shown (chi(2), p<0.001), while no association was found between DEP and SOM scores and pain duration in the overall sample (chi(2), p=0.742 and p=0.364, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Pain-related disability was found to be strongly related with depression and somatization levels as well as associated with pain duration. Depression and somatization scores were not associated with pain duration.

Prevalence of sleep bruxism in children: a systematic review of the literature

The aim of the present investigation was to perform a systematic review of the literature dealing with the issue of sleep bruxism prevalence in children at the general population level. Quality assessment of the reviewed papers was performed to identify flaws in the external and internal validity. Cut-off criteria for an acceptable external validity were established to select studies for the discussion of prevalence data. A total of 22 publications were included in the review, most of which had methodological problems limiting their external validity. Prevalence data extraction was performed only on eight papers that were consistent as for the sampling strategy and showed only minor external validity problems, but they had some common internal validity flaws related with the definition of sleep bruxism measures. All the selected papers based sleep bruxism diagnosis on proxy reports by the parents, and no epidemiological data were available from studies adopting other diagnostic strategies (e.g. polysomnography or electromyography). The reported prevalence was highly variable between the studies (3·5-40·6%), with a commonly described decrease with age and no gender differences. A very high variability in sleep bruxism prevalence in children was found, due to the different age groups under investigation and the different frequencies of self-reported sleep bruxism. This prevented from supporting any reliable estimates of the prevalence of sleep bruxism in children.

Self-reported Bruxism - associations with perceived stress, motivation for control, dental anxiety and gagging*

To examine possible associations between self-reported bruxism, stress, desirability of control, dental anxiety and gagging. Five questionnaires were distributed among a general adult population (402 respondents): the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), Desirability of Control Scale (DC), Dental Anxiety Scale (DAS), Gagging Assessment Scale (GAS), and Bruxism Assessment Questionnaire. A high positive correlation between DAS and GAS (R = 0·604, P < 0·001) was found. PSS was negatively correlated with DC (R = -0·292, P < 0·001), and was positively correlated with GAS (R = 0·217, P < 0·001) and DAS (R = 0·214, P < 0·001). Respondents who reported bruxing while awake or asleep showed higher levels of GAS, DAS and PSS than those who did not. There were no differences between the bruxers and the non-bruxers (sleep and aware) with regard to the DC scores. The best predictors of awake bruxism were sleep bruxism (OR = 4·98, CI 95% 2·54-9·74) and GAS (OR = 1·10, CI 95% 1·04-1·17). The best predictors of sleep bruxism were awake bruxism (OR = 5·0, CI 95% 2·56-9·78) and GAS (OR = 1·19; CI 95% 1·11-1·27). Self-reported sleep bruxism significantly increases the odds for awake bruxism and vice versa. Tendency for gagging during dental care slightly increases the odds of both types of self-reported bruxism, but desirability of control is not associated with these phenomena.

Self-reported bruxism and temporomandibular disorders: findings from two specialised centres

The aims of this investigation were to report the frequency of temporomandibular disorders (TMD) diagnoses and the prevalence of self-reported awake and sleep bruxism as well as to describe the possible differences between findings of two specialised centres as a basis to suggest recommendations for future improvements in diagnostic homogeneity and accuracy. A standardised Research Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (RDC/TMD) assessment was performed on patients attending both TMD Clinics, viz., at the University of Padova, Italy (n=219; 74% women) and at the University of Tel Aviv, Israel (n=397; 79% women), to assign axis I physical diagnoses and to record data on self-reported awake and sleep bruxism. Significant differences were shown between the two clinic samples as for the frequency of TMD diagnoses (chi-square, P<0·001) and the prevalence of at least one positive response to bruxism items (chi-square, P<0·001). The more widespread use of TMJ imaging techniques in one clinic sample led to a higher prevalence of multiple diagnoses, and the higher prevalence of self-reported bruxism in patients with myofascial pain alone described in the other clinic sample was not replicated, suggesting that the different adoption of clinical and imaging criteria to diagnose TMD may influence also reports on their association with bruxism. From this investigation, it emerged that the features of the study samples as well as the different interpretation of the same diagnostic guidelines may have strong influence on epidemiological reports on bruxism and TMD prevalence and on the association between the two disorders.

A retrospective analysis of temporomandibular findings among Israeli‐born patients based on the RDC/TMD

The purpose of this study was to evaluate temporomandibular disorders (TMD) Axis I and II among Israeli-Jewish patients using the Hebrew version of the Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) for TMD and to compare the results with Swedish, United States, Asian and Israeli-Arab populations. The study consisted of 298 Israeli-born, Jewish patients (male/female ratio 3.5:1), arriving at an Orofacial Pain Clinic during the year 2001-2004. A complete clinical examination was carried out according to the RDC/TMD protocol. Axis I diagnoses: 65% of the Israeli-Jewish patients exhibited myofacial pain (Group I disorder), 38% disc displacement (Group II disorder) and 18% arthralgia, osteoarthritis or osteoarthrosis (Group III disorder). Axis II diagnoses: 20% of the patients scored severe depression and 35% scored somatization. Pain was reported in 82% of the patients (mean pain duration 35.7-33.8 months for women, 44.1 for men). Patients had an average disability score of 30.0 +/- 30.2. Chronic pain grade IV was present in 4% of the patients. Israeli-Jewish temporomandibular disorder patients showed results similar to those reported for other countries, further supporting the use of the RDC/TMD internationally as a reliable epidemiological tool. Globally, Axis I scores were similar, while Axis II scores were more susceptible to geographic/ethnic differences. Gender can influence Axis I and Axis II as well as possible gender specific association with socio-economic status. In future comparisons, men and women should be considered separately.

Effect of Controlled Masticatory Exercise on Pain and Muscle Performance in Myofascial Pain Patients: A Pilot Study

Abstract The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that strengthening masticatory muscles using a controlled chewing exercise protocol improves muscle function, as evaluated quantitatively by electromyogram, and reduces pain at rest and during function. The study included 20 patients diagnosed with myofascial pain according to the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders with low masseter volume increase during maximal clench. The exercise group (ten patients) was subjected to a controlled gum chewing exercise protocol for eight weeks: the control group (ten patients) received only support and encouragement. Patients were examined at the beginning and at the end of the experiment which included an electromyogram (EMG) to assess muscle performance, masticatory muscle tenderness to palpation, mouth opening range, subjective anamnestic indices to evaluate pain perception and pain relief, and chewing tests. The EMG showed that the masticatory muscle exercise did produce objective physiologic results. In the exercise group, a significant increase was found in the electric muscle activity of the masseters during maximal voluntary clench (p=0.007). The exercise group showed significant reduction in pain during rest, pain during the chewing test, and a disability score. At the end of the study, a difference between the two groups was shown in the Pain Relief Scale: significantly greater pain relief was found in the exercise group as compared to the control group (p=0.019). For all other clinical parameters, there was no difference between the two groups or interaction between time and treatment. The results of this study seem to be equivocal. Additional experiments on larger population groups with extended chewing protocols are necessary before a more substantial conclusion can be reached.

Comorbidity between depression and anxiety in patients with temporomandibular disorders according to the research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders.

AIMS To examine the extent of depression, anxiety, somatization, and comorbidity between depression and anxiety in patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD) by adding the Symptom Checklist-90 Revised self-report questionnaire for anxiety to the Research Diagnostic Criteria for TMD. METHODS A total of 207 Israeli TMD patients were included in this retrospective study. Data included levels of depression, anxiety, somatization, and comorbidity in the study group as a whole, in chronic pain TMD patients compared to acute pain TMD patients, and in chronic pain TMD patients according to their Graded Chronic Pain Scale score. Spearman correlation was used to assess the level of correlation between depression, anxiety, and somatization. Fisher exact test or Pearson chi-square test was used to compare the categorical variables. RESULTS When depression, anxiety, somatization, and comorbidity were analyzed in a multidimensional approach, there were statistically significant differences between subgroups as to depression and somatization only. No statistically significant differences were found as to anxiety and comorbidity. CONCLUSION Multidimensional assessment enabled differentiation between findings of depression, anxiety, somatization, and comorbidity in subgroups of TMD patients. The findings of no statistically significant differences between subgroups of TMD patients as to anxiety and comorbidity support previous studies on TMD and anxiety, which suggest a less significant role of anxiety in chronic TMD patients as compared to depression and somatization.

Classifying degenerative joint disease by the RDC/TMD and by panoramic imaging: a retrospective analysis

The purposes of the study were to evaluate the utility of diagnosing degenerative joint disease (DJD) by the clinical finding of coarse crepitus alone, without supporting imaging studies, as defined by the RDC/TMD, and to evaluate the contribution of panoramic radiography as an aid in the diagnosis of DJD. A retrospective analysis of 372 consecutive patients with TMD was conducted. Their panoramic radiographs were evaluated for the extent of their contribution to the final diagnosis. Panoramic radiography was of no diagnostic value in 94.4% of the cases when the group was considered as a whole. When patients diagnosed with DJD were considered separately, panoramic radiography was completely sufficient for reaching the final diagnosis in 20.0% of the cases. In almost 90% of these patients, however, the clinical examination did not support the diagnosis of DJD (no coarse crepitus was found). This raises some doubts about the effectiveness of the clinical examination according to the RDC/TMD and about the utility of panoramic radiography in the definitive diagnosis of DJD, because both techniques have low accuracy (11.1% and 20%, respectively). The present study supports the current recommendations that panoramic radiography should not be ordered routinely to assess DJD, but still it is first choice when any dental problem is suspected. Further additional imaging (computerized tomography, magnetic resonance imaging) should be considered only if there is reason to expect that the findings might affect diagnosis and management. This study adds to recent criticisms of the clinical validity of the RDC/TMD, with regard to DJD.