Constructing the brief diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (bDC/TMD) for field testing.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in temporomandibular disorders' (TMDs) diagnosis, the diagnostic process continues to be problematic in non-specialist settings. OBJECTIVE: To complete a Delphi process to shorten the Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD) to a brief DC/TMD (bDC/TMD) for expedient clinical diagnosis and initial management. METHODS: An international Delphi panel was created with 23 clinicians representing major specialities, general dentistry and related fields. The process comprised a full day workshop, seven virtual meetings, six rounds of electronic discussion and finally an open consultation at a virtual international symposium. RESULTS: Within the physical axis (Axis 1), the self-report Symptom Questionnaire of the DC/TMD did not require shortening from 14 items for the bDC/TMD. The compulsory use of the TMD pain screener was removed reducing the total number of Axis 1 items by 18%. The DC/TMD Axis 1 10-section examination protocol (25 movements, up to 12 sets of bilateral palpations) was reduced to four sections in the bDC/TMD protocol involving three movements and three sets of palpations. Axis I then resulted in two groups of diagnoses: painful TMD (inclusive of secondary headache), and common joint-related TMD with functional implications. The psychosocial axis (Axis 2) was shortened to an ultra-brief 11 item assessment. CONCLUSION: The bDC/TMD represents a substantially reduced and likely expedited method to establish (grouping) diagnoses in TMDs. This may provide greater utility for settings requiring less granular diagnoses for the implementation of initial treatment, for example non-specialist general dental practice.

Diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders-INfORM recommendations: Comprehensive and short-form adaptations for children.

BACKGROUND: The Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) are used worldwide in adults. Until now, no adaptation for use in children has been proposed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to present comprehensive and short-form adaptations of Axis I and Axis II of the DC/TMD for adults that are appropriate for use with children in clinical and research settings. METHODS: Global Delphi studies with experts in TMDs and in pain psychology identified ways of adapting the DC/TMD for children. RESULTS: The proposed adaptation is suitable for children aged 6-9 years. Proposed changes in Axis I include (i) adapting the language of the Demographics and the Symptom Questionnaires to be developmentally appropriate for children, (ii) adding a general health questionnaire for children and one for their parents, (iii) replacing the TMD Pain Screener with the 3Q/TMD questionnaire and (iv) modifying the clinical examination protocol. Proposed changes in Axis II include (i) for the Graded Chronic Pain Scale, to be developmentally appropriate for children, (ii) adding anxiety and depression assessments that have been validated in children and (iii) adding three constructs (stress, catastrophising and sleep disorders) to assess psychosocial functioning in children. CONCLUSION: The recommended DC/TMD, including Axis I and Axis II, for children aged 6-9 years, is appropriate for use in clinical and research settings. This adapted the first version for children includes changes in Axis I and Axis II changes requiring reliability and validity testing in international settings. Official translations to different languages according to INfORM requirements will enable a worldwide dissemination and implementation.

Diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders-INfORM recommendations: Comprehensive and short-form adaptations for adolescents.

BACKGROUND: The Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) for use in adults is in use worldwide. Until now, no version of this instrument for use in adolescents has been proposed. OBJECTIVE: To present comprehensive and short-form adaptations of the adult version of DC/TMD that are appropriate for use with adolescents in clinical and research settings. METHODS: International experts in TMDs and experts in pain psychology participated in a Delphi process to identify ways of adapting the DC/TMD protocol for physical and psychosocial assessment of adolescents. RESULTS: The proposed adaptation defines adolescence as ages 10-19 years. Changes in the physical diagnosis (Axis I) include (i) adapting the language of the Demographics and the Symptom Questionnaires to be developmentally appropriate for adolescents, (ii) adding two general health questionnaires, one for the adolescent patient and one for their caregivers and (iii) replacing the TMD Pain Screener with the 3Q/TMD questionnaire. Changes in the psychosocial assessment (Axis II) include (i) adapting the language of the Graded Chronic Pain Scale to be developmentally appropriate for adolescents, (ii) adding anxiety and depression assessment that have been validated for adolescents and (iii) adding three constructs (stress, catastrophizing and sleep disorders) to assess psychosocial functioning in adolescents. CONCLUSION: The recommended DC/TMD, including Axis I and Axis II for adolescents, is appropriate to use in clinical and research settings. This adapted first version for adolescents includes changes in Axis I and Axis II requiring reliability and validity testing in international settings. Official translations of the comprehensive and short-form to different languages according to INfORM requirements will enable a worldwide dissemination and implementation.

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.

Diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders in children and adolescents: An international Delphi study-Part 2-Development of Axis II.

BACKGROUND: Unlike the psychosocial assessment established for adults in the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD), a standardised psychosocial assessment for children and adolescents with TMD complaints has not yet been established. OBJECTIVES: To develop a new standardised instrument set to assess the psychosocial functioning in children and adolescents by adapting the psychosocial status and pain-related disability (Axis II) of the adult DC/TMD and by including new instruments. METHODS: A modified Delphi method was used to survey 23 international TMD experts and four international experts in pain-related psychological factors for consensus regarding assessment tools for psychosocial functioning and pain-related disability in children and adolescents. The TMD experts reviewed 29 Axis II statements at round 1, 13 at round 2 and 2 at round 3. Agreement was set at 80% for first-round consensus level and 70% for each of the second and third rounds. The psychological experts completed a complementary Delphi survey to reach a consensus on tools to use to assess more complex psychological domains in children and adolescents. For the psychological experts, the first round included 10 open-ended questions on preferred screening tools for depression, anxiety, catastrophising, sleep problems and stress in children (ages 6-9 years old) and adolescents (ages 10-19 years old) as well as on other domains suggested for investigation. In the second round, the psychological experts received a 9-item questionnaire to prioritise the suggested instruments from most to least recommended. RESULTS: The TMD experts, after three Delphi rounds, reached consensus on the changes of DC/TMD to create a form to evaluate Axis II in children and adolescents with TMD complaints. The psychological experts added tools to assess depression and anxiety, sleep disorders, catastrophising, stress and resilience. CONCLUSION: Through international expert consensus, this study adapted Axis II of the adult DC/TMD to assess psychosocial functioning and pain-related disability in children and adolescents. The adapted Axis II protocols will be validated in the target populations.

Effect of comorbid migraine on propranolol efficacy for painful TMD in a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The migraine-preventive drug propranolol is efficacious in reducing pain from temporomandibular disorder, suggesting potential modifying or mediating effects of comorbid migraine. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, myofascial temporomandibular disorder patients were treated with propranolol or placebo for 9 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in a facial pain index derived from daily symptom diaries. Linear and logistic regression models tested for a migraine × treatment-group interaction in reducing facial pain index. Counterfactual models explored changes in headache impact and heart rate as mediators of propranolol's efficacy. RESULTS: Propranolol's efficacy in reducing facial pain index was greater among the 104 migraineurs than the 95 non-migraineurs: For example, for the binary ≥ 30% reduction in facial pain index, odds ratios were 3.3 (95% confidence limits: 1.4, 8.1) versus 1.3 (0.5, 3.2), respectively, although the interaction was statistically non-significant (p = 0.139). Cumulative response curves confirmed greater efficacy for migraineurs than non-migraineurs (differences in area under the curve 26% and 6%, respectively; p = 0.081). While 9% of the treatment effect was mediated by reduced headache impact, 46% was mediated by reduced heart rate. CONCLUSIONS: Propranolol was more efficacious in reducing temporomandibular disorder pain among migraineurs than non-migraineurs, with more of the effect mediated by reduced heart rate than by reduced headache impact. STUDY IDENTIFICATION AND REGISTRATION: SOPPRANO; NCT02437383; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02437383.

Association between waking-state oral behaviours, according to the oral behaviors checklist, and TMD subgroups.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the association between waking-state oral behaviours and temporomandibular disorder (TMD) subgroups and to develop new scoring methods for the Oral Behavior Checklist (OBC). METHODS: Patients with any TMD diagnosis, according to the diagnostic criteria for TMD (DC/TMD), were divided into subgroups: 'Dysfunctional-TMD' (n = 70), only mechanical dysfunction; 'Painful-TMD' (n = 204), only myalgia, arthralgia or both; and 'Painful-Dysfunctional TMD' (n = 95), combined pain and dysfunction. A group of individuals without TMD, 'Non-TMD' (n = 374), was used for testing associations. Participants completed the OBC. An exploratory factor analysis, followed by a confirmatory factor analysis of the OBC responses, identified 2 major factors, named non-functional activities (NFA) and functional activities (FA). Component total scores were computed. Differences among subgroups for OBC-MS (mean score) and NFA and FA factor scores were estimated using one-way ANOVA and Tukey post hoc tests. Significance was set at p < .05. RESULTS: The OBC-MS in Non-TMD, Painful-TMD and Painful-Dysfunctional TMD subgroups was higher than in the Dysfunctional-TMD subgroup (p ≤ .001). NFA in Painful-TMD and Painful-Dysfunctional TMD subgroups were higher than in the Non-TMD group (p < .05); NFA in the Dysfunctional-TMD subgroup were lower than in the Painful-TMD subgroup (p = .034). In contrast, FA in Painful-TMD, Dysfunctional-TMD and Painful-Dysfunctional TMD subgroups were lower than in the Non-TMD group (p < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: A new scoring method for the OBC results in item reduction and creation of meaningful subscales for functional and non-functional behaviours, which are differentially associated with painful and dysfunctional TMDs. This may help clinicians to better tailor treatment for the management of subtypes of TMD patients.

Are oral overuse behaviours associated with painful temporomandibular disorders? A cross-sectional study in Portuguese university students.

BACKGROUND: Many different types of oral overuse behaviours occur frequently in adult populations with painful temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). Less is known regarding these behaviours and their associations with TMDs in university students. OBJECTIVES: Test the association between frequency of different oral overuse behaviours evaluated by the Oral Behaviour Checklist (OBC) and the severity of painful TMDs. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 1381 students from 19 universities in the Oporto District, Portugal, completed the Research Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (RDC/TMD) Personal History Questionnaire and the OBC, and they received an RDC/TMD clinical examination. The OBC sum score (ranging from 0 to 84 points) was classified as normal (0 ≤ 16 points), low overuse (17 ≤ 24) or high overuse (≥25). Painful TMD subtypes (myalgia, arthralgia or combined) were identified. Associations were tested using multivariable binary logistic regression models (α = .05), adjusted for age and sex, and referencing the normal parafunction group. RESULTS: University students with high overuse were more likely to have a painful TMD: myalgia (OR = 1.9, 95% CL: 1.3-3.0); arthralgia (OR = 2.2; 95% CL: 1.4-3.4), combined (OR = 5.0; 95% CL: 3.1-8.1). Students with low overuse were more likely to have only the combined painful TMD (OR = 2.4; 95% CL: 1.4-4.0) but not the individual painful disorders. Of the 21 different behaviours, 13 were reported at least 50% of the time. CONCLUSIONS: In this university student sample, oral overuse behaviours are widespread, and their overall extent exhibited a dose-response relationship with respect to severity of painful TMDs based on pain and chronicity. Only some behaviours were independently associated with painful TMDs, suggesting the value of further OBC instrument development.

Developing a research diagnostic criteria for burning mouth syndrome: Results from an international Delphi process.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a beta version of a preliminary set of empirically derived research diagnostic criteria (RDC) for burning mouth syndrome (BMS) through expert consensus, which can then be taken into a test period before publication of a final RDC/BMS. DESIGN: A 6 round Delphi process with twelve experts in the field of BMS was used. The first round formed a focus group during which the purpose of the RDC and the definition of BMS was agreed upon, as well as the structure and contents. The remaining rounds were carried out virtually via email to achieve a consensus of the beta version of the RDC/BMS. RESULTS: The definition of BMS was agreed to be 'an intraoral burning or dysaesthetic sensation, recurring daily for more than 2 hours per day over more than 3 months, without evident causative lesions on clinical examination and investigation'. The RDC was based upon the already developed and validated RDC/TMD and formed three main parts: patient self-report; examination; and psychosocial self-report. A fourth additional part was also developed listing aspirational biomarkers which could be used as part of the BMS diagnosis where available, or to inform future research. CONCLUSION: This Delphi process has created a beta version of an RDC for use with BMS. This will allow future clinical research within BMS to be carried out to a higher standard, ensuring only patients with true BMS are included. Further validation studies will be required alongside refinement of the RDC as trialling progresses.

Diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (DC/TMD) for children and adolescents: An international Delphi study-Part 1-Development of Axis I.

BACKGROUND: Since in children and adolescence prevalence is assessed mainly on self-reported or proxy-reported signs and symptoms; there is a need to develop a more comprehensive standardised process for the collection of clinical information and the diagnosis of TMD in these populations. OBJECTIVE: To develop new instruments and to adapt the diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (DC/TMD) for the evaluation of TMD in children and adolescents. METHOD: A modified Delphi method was used to seek international consensus among TMD experts. Fourteen clinicians and researchers in the field of oro-facial pain and TMD worldwide were invited to participate in a workshop initiated by the International Network for Orofacial Pain and Related Disorders Methodology (INfORM scientific network) at the General Session of the International Association for Dental Research (IADR, London 2018), as the first step in the Delphi process. Participants discussed the protocols required to make physical diagnoses included in the Axis I of the DC/TMD. Thereafter, nine experts in the field were added, and the first Delphi round was created. This survey included 60 statements for Axis I, and the experts were asked to respond to each statement on a five-item Likert scale ranging from 'Strongly disagree' to 'Strongly agree'. Consensus level was set at 80% agreement for the first round, and at 70% for the next. RESULTS: After three rounds of the Delphi process, a consensus among TMD experts was achieved and two adapted DC/TMD protocols for Axis I physical diagnoses for children and adolescents were developed. CONCLUSION: Through international consensus among TMD experts, this study adapted the Axis I of the DC/TMD for use in evaluating TMD in children and adolescents.

Clinical, psychological, and sensory characteristics associated with headache attributed to temporomandibular disorder in people with chronic myogenous temporomandibular disorder and primary headaches.

BACKGROUND: Headache attributed to Temporomandibular Disorder (HATMD) is a secondary headache that may have features resulting in diagnostic overlap with primary headaches, namely, tension-type (TTH) or migraine. This cross-sectional study of people with both chronic myogenous TMD and primary headaches evaluated characteristics associated with HATMD. METHODS: From a clinical trial of adults, baseline data were used from a subset with diagnoses of both TMD myalgia according to the Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD) and TTH or migraine according to the International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition. HATMD was classified based on the DC/TMD. Questionnaires and examinations evaluated 42 characteristics of facial pain, headache, general health, psychological distress, and experimental pain sensitivity. Univariate regression models quantified the associations of each characteristic with HATMD (present versus absent), headache type (TTH versus migraine), and their interaction in a factorial design. Multivariable lasso regression identified the most important predictors of HATMD. RESULTS: Of 185 participants, 114 (61.6%) had HATMD, while the numbers with TTH (n = 98, 53.0%) and migraine (n = 87, 47.0%) were similar. HATMD was more likely among migraineurs (61/87 = 70.1%) than participants with TTH (53/98 = 54.1%; odds ratio = 2.0; 95%CL = 1.1, 3.7). In univariate analyses, characteristics associated with HATMD included pain-free jaw opening and examination-evoked pain in masticatory muscles and temporomandibular joints (TMJ) as well as frequency and impact of headache, but not frequency or impact of facial pain. Lowered blood pressure but not psychological or sensory characteristics was associated with HATMD. Multiple characteristics of facial pain, headache, general health, and psychological distress differed between TTH or migraine groups. Few interactions were observed, demonstrating that most characteristics' associations with HATMD were consistent in TTH and migraine groups. The lasso model identified headache frequency and examination-evoked muscle pain as the most important predictors of HATMD. CONCLUSIONS: HATMD is highly prevalent among patients with chronic myogenous TMD and headaches and often presents as migraine. In contrast to primary headaches, HATMD is associated with higher headache frequency and examination-evoked masticatory muscle pain, but with surprisingly few measures of facial pain, general health, and psychological distress. A better understanding of HATMD is necessary for developing targeted strategies for its management. TRIAL IDENTIFICATION AND REGISTRATION: SOPPRANO; NCT02437383 . Registered May 7, 2015.

A functional substitution in the L-aromatic amino acid decarboxylase enzyme worsens somatic symptoms via a serotonergic pathway.

OBJECTIVE: Heightened somatic symptoms are reported by a wide range of patients with chronic pain and have been associated with emotional distress and physical dysfunction. Despite their clinical significance, molecular mechanisms leading to their manifestation are not understood. METHODS: We used an association study design based on a curated list of 3,295 single nucleotide polymorphisms mapped to 358 genes to test somatic symptoms reporting using the Pennebaker Inventory of Limbic Languidness questionnaire from a case-control cohort of orofacial pain (n = 1,607). A replication meta-analysis of 3 independent cohorts (n = 3,189) was followed by functional validation, including in silico molecular dynamics, in vitro enzyme assays, and measures of serotonin (5-HT) plasma concentration. RESULTS: An association with the T allele of rs11575542 coding for an arginine to glutamine substitution in the L-aromatic amino acid decarboxylase (AADC) enzyme was replicated in a meta-analysis of 3 independent cohorts. In a combined meta-analysis of all cohorts, this association reached p = 6.43 × 10-8 . In silico studies demonstrated that this substitution dramatically reduces the conformational dynamics of AADC, potentially lowering its binding capacity to a cofactor. in vitro enzymatic assays showed that this substitution reduces the maximum kinetic velocity of AADC, hence lowering 5-HT levels. Finally, plasma samples from 90 subjects showed correlation between low 5-HT levels and heightened somatic symptoms. INTERPRETATION: Using functional genomics approaches, we identified a polymorphism in the AADC enzyme that contributes to somatic symptoms through reduced levels of 5-HT. Our findings suggest a molecular mechanism underlying the pathophysiology of somatic symptoms and opens up new treatment options targeting the serotonergic system. ANN NEUROL 2019;86:168-180.

Challenges in the clinical implementation of a biopsychosocial model for assessment and management of orofacial pain.

Distress, suffering and care-seeking behaviour are characteristics of pain-related disease and illness. Pain that transitions from an acute to a chronic phase carries with it the potential of further effects: these include a worsening of the disease or illness; high-impact chronic pain; and substantial personal, societal and economic burden. The biopsychosocial model directly addresses these multiple processes, yet clinical frameworks supporting this model are not universally implemented. This paper explores barriers to clinical implementation of a full biopsychosocial framework for temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and other oro-facial pain (OFP) conditions. In June 2016, INfORM invited OFP researchers to a workshop designed to optimise the DC/TMD Axis-II. Workshop groups identified five sources of implementation barriers: (1) cultures and societies, (2) levels-of-care settings, (3) health services, (4) cross-cultural validity of self-report instruments and (5) provider and patient health literacy. Three core problems emerged: (A) mental health aspects are seldom fully considered, thus impairing the recognition of illness, (B) training in use of validated multi-axial assessment protocols is under-rated and insufficiently used, and (C) clinical assessment often fails to recognise that sensory and emotional dimensions are fundamental aspects of pain. To improve patient care, these barriers and problems require action. Most importantly, TMD/OFP educators and researchers need to coordinate globally and (i) be educated in the biopsychosocial model, (ii) implement evidence-based biopsychosocial guidelines for assessment and management of OFP conditions at their institutions, (iii) incorporate this model in undergraduate and postgraduate dental curricula and (iv) be responsive to stakeholders, including regulatory authorities and practitioners.

Cross-cultural differences in types and beliefs about treatment in women with temporomandibular disorder pain.

OBJECTIVES: Women with temporomandibular disorder (TMD) pain from three cultures were assessed for type of treatment received and core illness beliefs. METHODS: In a clinical setting, 122 women patients with chronic TMD pain (39 Saudis, 41 Swedes and 42 Italians) were evaluated for patient characteristics, type of practitioner, type of treatment received and beliefs about TMD prior to consultation in TMD specialist centres. Measures included a survey of treatments received and a belief scale regarding contributing, aggravating and treatment-relevant factors related to the pain. All questionnaires were translated from English and culturally adapted. Comparisons among cultural groups were performed using a linear regression model for continuous variables and logistic regression model for dichotomous variables. A P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The study found no significant associations between cultures and the type of practitioners consulted previously. Treatments differed among cultures: Swedes most commonly received behavioural therapy, acupuncture and an occlusal appliance; Saudis most commonly received Islamic medicine; and Italians most commonly received an antidepressant. Swedes were significantly more likely than Saudis and Italians to believe that TMD pain treatment should address behavioural factors. CONCLUSIONS: Among Saudi, Italian and Swedish women with chronic TMD pain, culture does not influence the type of practitioner consulted before visiting a TMD specialist or their beliefs about contributing and aggravating factors for their pain. However, treatment types and beliefs concerning mechanisms underlying the pain differed cross-culturally, with local availability or larger cultural beliefs also probably influencing the types of treatments that TMD patients pursue.

Cultural equivalence, reliability and utility of the Portuguese version of the Oral Behaviours Checklist.

BACKGROUND: Oral behaviors (OBs) must be assessed as part of a biobehavioural evaluation for patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD). OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were: to translate and culturally adapt the Oral Behaviors Checklist (OBC) into Portuguese; to evaluate its basic psychometric properties; and to assess the utility of the Portuguese OBC. METHODS: The Portuguese translation, cross-cultural equivalence, and two studies (Pre-field test, N = 8, and field test, N = 45) of the OBC adhered to official guidelines of the International RDC/TMD Research Consortium (now, INfORM). In the formal test (N = 120) the Portuguese RDC/TMD was used for TMD diagnosis. RESULTS: Translation and cultural equivalence of the OBC into Portuguese was reviewed and approved by an expert panel. In the field test, item agreement between English and Portuguese OBC versions was very good (weighted Kappa ≥ 0.934). Test-retest reliability of the OBCS umScore was excellent intra-class correlation coefficient ((ICC) = 0.998, P < 0.001). As an initial probe into validity using parallel forms, comparison of the sleep bruxism and awake clenching questions included in the RDC/TMD with the corresponding OBC questions yielded excellent (Kappa = 0.932) and very good (k = 0.850), respectively, convergent validity as well as excellent (that is, poor agreement, kappa = 0.013) discriminant validity for these specific OBs. The mean OBCS umScore was significantly lower for the healthy group, compared to the painful TMD group (ANOVA, P = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: The Portuguese translation of the OBC exhibits cross-cultural equivalence for use in Portugal, and the instrument performs with acceptable psychometric properties. The validity of the parafunction construct requires additional research in both Portuguese and other languages.

Effect of somatosensory amplification and trait anxiety on experimentally induced orthodontic pain.

The perception of pain varies considerably across individuals and is affected by psychological traits. This study aimed to investigate the combined effects of somatosensory amplification and trait anxiety on orthodontic pain. Five-hundred and five adults completed the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the Somatosensory Amplification Scale (SSAS). Individuals with combined STAI and SSAS scores below the 20th percentile (LASA group: five men and 12 women; mean age ± SD = 22.4 ± 1.3 yr) or above the 80th percentile (HASA group: 13 men and seven women; mean age ± SD = 23.7 ± 1.0 yr) were selected and filled in the Oral Behaviors Checklist (OBC). Orthodontic separators were placed for 5 d in order to induce experimental pain. Visual analog scales (VAS) were administered to collect ratings for occlusal discomfort, pain, and perceived stress. Pressure pain thresholds (PPT) were measured. A mixed regression model was used to evaluate pain and discomfort ratings over the 5-d duration of the study. At baseline, the LASA group had statistically significantly higher PPT values for the masseter muscle than did the HASA group. During the experimental procedure, the HASA group had statistically significantly higher discomfort and pain. A significant difference in pain ratings during the 5 d of the study was found for subjects in the HASA group. Higher OBC values were statistically significantly positively associated with pain. Somatosensory amplification and trait anxiety substantially affect experimentally induced orthodontic pain.

Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD): Polish assessment instruments.

The article presents the Polish version of the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD), the process of document translation and cultural adaptation.

Whole-genome methylation profiling reveals regions associated with painful temporomandibular disorders and active recovery processes.

ABSTRACT: Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs), collectively representing one of the most common chronic pain conditions, have a substantial genetic component, but genetic variation alone has not fully explained the heritability of TMD risk. Reasoning that the unexplained heritability may be because of DNA methylation, an epigenetic phenomenon, we measured genome-wide DNA methylation using the Illumina MethylationEPIC platform with blood samples from participants in the Orofacial Pain: Prospective Evaluation and Risk Assessment (OPPERA) study. Associations with chronic TMD used methylation data from 496 chronic painful TMD cases and 452 TMD-free controls. Changes in methylation between enrollment and a 6-month follow-up visit were determined for a separate sample of 62 people with recent-onset painful TMD. More than 750,000 individual CpG sites were examined for association with chronic painful TMD. Six differentially methylated regions were significantly ( P < 5 × 10 -8 ) associated with chronic painful TMD, including loci near genes involved in the regulation of inflammatory and neuronal response. A majority of loci were similarly differentially methylated in acute TMD consistent with observed transience or persistence of symptoms at follow-up. Functional characterization of the identified regions found relationships between methylation at these loci and nearby genetic variation contributing to chronic painful TMD and with gene expression of proximal genes. These findings reveal epigenetic contributions to chronic painful TMD through methylation of the genes FMOD , PM20D1 , ZNF718 , ZFP57 , and RNF39 , following the development of acute painful TMD. Epigenetic regulation of these genes likely contributes to the trajectory of transcriptional events in affected tissues leading to resolution or chronicity of pain.

The Chronic Overlapping Pain Condition Screener.

Ten Chronic Overlapping Pain Conditions (COPCs) are currently recognized by the National Institutes of Health Pain Consortium (eg, irritable bowel syndrome, chronic migraine headache, and chronic low back pain). These conditions affect millions of Americans; however, assessing these conditions, their co-occurrence, and their relationship to treatment has proven challenging due to time constraints and a lack of standardized measures. We present a Chronic Overlapping Pain Condition-Screener (COPC-S) that is logic-driven, efficient, and freely available in electronic format to nonprofit entities. Thirty experts were convened to identify and modify self-report criteria for each COPC as well as criteria that trigger the administration of the diagnostic criteria from a body map and a brief series of questions. Their recommendations were then programmed into the Research Electronic Data Capture platform and refined for comprehensibility and ease of use by patient focus groups. The electronic screener and physician-administered criteria were both administered to patients with known COPCs in a counter-balanced fashion to determine the level of agreement between methods. The expert panel identified screening items/body map regions and diagnostic criteria for all 10 COPCs. Patients found the content comprehensible and the platform easy to use. Cohen's Kappa statistics suggested good agreement between the electronic COPC-S and criteria administered by a physician (κ = .813). The COPC-S is an efficient tool for screening multiple COPCs and has applicability to research studies, clinical trials, and clinical practice. PERSPECTIVE: Assessing COPCs remains a challenge for researchers and clinicians. The COPC-S is an efficient and logic-driven electronic tool that allows for the rapid screening assessment of 10 COPCs. The instrument may have utility in research and clinical settings.