Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Assunto da revista
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Clin Rehabil ; 37(7): 891-926, 2023 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36594219

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Summarize the evidence from randomized controlled trials and controlled trials that examined the effectiveness of electrotherapy in the treatment of patients with orofacial pain. DATA SOURCE: Medline, Embase, CINAHL PLUS with Full text, Cochrane Library Trials, Web of Science, and Scopus. REVIEW METHODS: A data search (last update, July 1, 2022) and a manual search were performed (October 5, 2022). Trials involving adults with orofacial pain receiving electrotherapy compared with any other type of treatment were included. The main outcome was pain intensity; secondary outcomes were mouth opening and tenderness. The reporting was based on the new PRISMA Guidelines. RESULTS: From the electronics databases and manual search 43 studies were included. Although this study was open to including any type of orofacial pain, only studies that investigated temporomandibular disorders were found. The overall quality of the evidence for pain intensity was very low. Although the results should be carefully used, transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation therapy showed to be clinically superior to placebo for reducing pain after treatment (2.63 [-0.48; 5.74]) and at follow-up (0.96 [-0.02; 1.95]) and reduce tenderness after treatment (1.99 [-0.33; 4.32]) and at follow-up (2.43 [-0.24; 5.10]) in subjects with mixed temporomandibular disorders. CONCLUSION: The results of this systematic review support the use of transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation therapy for patients with mixed temporomandibular disorders to improve pain intensity, and tenderness demonstrating that transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation is superior to placebo. There is inconsistent evidence supporting the superiority of transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation against other therapies.


Assuntos
Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica , Estimulação Elétrica Nervosa Transcutânea , Adulto , Humanos , Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica/métodos , Estimulação Elétrica Nervosa Transcutânea/métodos , Medição da Dor , Dor Facial/diagnóstico , Dor Facial/etiologia , Dor Facial/terapia
2.
Disabil Rehabil ; : 1-17, 2024 Feb 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38357796

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To determine the effectiveness of different types of acupuncture in reducing pain, improving maximum mouth opening and jaw functions in adults with orofacial pain. METHODS: Six databases were searched until 15 June 2023. The Cochrane risk of bias tool and GRADE were employed to evaluate bias and overall evidence certainty. RESULTS: Among 52 studies, 86.5% (n = 45) exhibited high risk of bias. Common acupoints, including Hegu LI 4, Jiache ST 6, and Xiaguan ST 7, were used primarily for patients with temporomandibular disorder [TMDs]. Meta-analyses indicated that acupuncture significantly reduced pain intensity in individuals with myogenous TMD (MD = 26.02 mm, I2=89%, p = 0.05), reduced tenderness in the medial pterygoid muscle (standardised mean differences [SMD] = 1.72, I2 = 0%, p < 0.00001) and jaw dysfunction (SMD = 1.62, I2 = 88%, p = 0.010) in mixed TMD when compared to sham/no treatment. However, the overall certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcomes as evaluated by GRADE. CONCLUSION: The overall results in this review should be interpreted with caution as there was a high risk of bias across the majority of randomized controlled trial (RCTs), and the overall certainty of the evidence was very low. Therefore, future studies with high-quality RCTs are warranted evaluating the use of acupuncture in patients with orofacial pain.


Acupuncture could potentially reduce subjective pain intensity and sensitivity of masticatory muscles, improve mouth opening, and reduce dysfunction in orofacial pain, specifically in patients with temporomandibular disorder (TMD).Acupuncture points such as LI4, ST6, ST7, GB20, SI19, ST36 were the most commonly used acupuncture points to treat patients with orofacial pain, especially TMDs.Clinicians can use the information in this review with caution to develop an effective and appropriate treatment regimen for the acupuncture treatment of patients with TMDs.

3.
Disabil Rehabil ; 45(20): 3219-3237, 2023 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36263978

RESUMO

PURPOSE: To determine the effectiveness of laser therapy for managing patients with orofacial pain (OFP). In addition, to determine which parameters provide the best treatment effects to reduce pain, improve function, and quality of life in adults with OFP. METHODS: Systematic review. Searches were conducted in six databases; no date or language restrictions were applied. Studies involving adults with OFP treated with laser therapy were included. The risk of bias (RoB) was performed with the Revised Cochrane RoB-2. A meta-analysis was structured around the OFP type, and outcomes. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessed the overall certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: Eighty-nine studies were included. Most studies (n = 72, 80.9%) were considered to have a high RoB. The results showed that laser therapy was better than placebo in improving pain, maximal mouth open (MMO), protrusion, and tenderness at the final assessment, but with a low or moderate level of evidence. The best lasers and parameters to reduce pain are diode or gallium-aluminum-arsenide (GaAlAs) lasers, a wavelength of 400-800 or 800-1500 nm, and dosage of <25 J/cm2. CONCLUSIONS: Laser therapy was better than placebo to improve pain, MMO, protrusion, and tenderness. Also, it was better than occlusal splint to improve pain, but not better than TENS and medication.Implications for rehabilitationLaser therapy was found to be good in improving pain, maximal mouth opening, jaw protrusion, and tenderness at the end of the treatment.For patients with all types of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) (myogenous, arthrogenous, and mixed), the following lasers and parameters are recommended: diode or gallium-aluminum-arsenide (GaAlAs) laser, wavelength of 400-800 or 800-1500 nm, and a dosage <25 J/cm2.For patients with arthrogenous TMDs, the following lasers and parameters are recommended: Diode laser and a wavelength between 400 and 800 nm.For patients with myogenous TMDs, the following lasers and parameters are recommended: diode laser, wavelength between 800 and 1500 nm, and dosage of <25 J/cm2.For patients with mixed TMDs, the following lasers and parameters are recommended: diode, GaAlAs, or infrared laser, a wavelength of 800-1500 nm, a dosage >100 J/cm2, and an application time between 15 and 30 s or >60 seconds.


Assuntos
Terapia com Luz de Baixa Intensidade , Transtornos da Articulação Temporomandibular , Adulto , Humanos , Terapia com Luz de Baixa Intensidade/métodos , Medição da Dor , Alumínio , Qualidade de Vida , Dor Facial/radioterapia , Transtornos da Articulação Temporomandibular/radioterapia
4.
Life (Basel) ; 13(2)2023 Jan 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36836693

RESUMO

The objective was to compile, synthetize, and evaluate the quality of the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding the effectiveness of manual trigger point therapy in the orofacial area in patients with or without orofacial pain. This project was registered in PROSPERO and follows the PRISMA guidelines. Searches (20 April 2021) were conducted in six databases for RCTs involving adults with active or latent myofascial trigger points (mTrPs) in the orofacial area. The data were extracted by two independent assessors. Four studies were included. According to the GRADE approach, the overall quality/certainty of the evidence was very low due to the high risk of bias of the studies included. Manual trigger point therapy showed no clear advantage over other conservative treatments. However, it was found to be an equally effective and safe therapy for individuals with myofascial trigger points in the orofacial region and better than control groups. This systematic review revealed a limited number of RCTs conducted with patients with mTrPs in the orofacial area and the methodological limitations of those RCTs. Rigorous, well-designed RCTs are still needed in this field.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa