Are orofacial pain and xerostomia associated with differences in diet, sensory perception, appetite and enjoyment of eating?-An explorative study.

BACKGROUND: Orofacial function is believed to influence an individual's diet. knowledge on appetite and enjoyment of eating in orofacially impaired individuals is scarce. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to explore potential associations between impaired orofacial function, that is, orofacial pain, jaw function limitation and xerostomia, respectively, and diet, appetite, taste perception, as well as the enjoyment of eating. METHODS: An online questionnaire was shared among Aarhus University's dental patients and through social media. A convenience sample of 351 individuals responded (97 men, 254 women, aged 18-86 years). Participants were divided into groups with and without orofacial pain or xerostomia based on responses. Questions about food intake, appetite, meal-related well-being and oral/general health were included. Data were analysed using Mann Whitney U tests, Spearman's correlation, Chi-square tests, and t-tests. RESULTS: Participants with (n = 123) and without (n = 228) orofacial pain differed significantly regarding age, perceived oral/general health, frequency of consumption of for example cooked vegetables and raw whole fruit, perception of sourness, chewiness, and nausea/pain when eating (p ≤ .031). Participants with (n = 101) and without (n = 250) xerostomia differed significantly regarding perceived oral/general health, intake of prepared fruit, alcohol, ice cream/mousse/pudding, general appetite, intake of breakfast and liquid snacks, nausea/pain when eating, taste and chewiness of food (p ≤ .038). CONCLUSION: Diet, appetite, taste and sensory perception, as well as enjoyment of eating of individuals reporting orofacial pain and/or xerostomia differed slightly to that of individuals free of such symptoms. However, due to the explorative nature of this study, the results should be interpreted with caution pending further research on potential long-term effects on nutritional status and well-being.

Pleasantness and unpleasantness in somatosensory investigation.

BACKGROUND: Qualitative sensory testing (QualST) is a simple, standardised, chairside method for evaluating somatosensory function; however, testing focuses on detection of cold, touch and pain with no recognition of perceptions of pleasantness and unpleasantness. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to utilise the stimuli in QualST, with the addition of a soft brush, to investigate stimulus-evoked perceptions of pleasantness and unpleasantness on the facial skin and if any side-to-side differences. Additional aims were to determine the inter- and intra-rater reliability using the modified QualST protocol and in the side-to-side differences. METHODS: Thirty healthy adult female participants underwent three sessions of sensitivity testing as per the modified QualST protocol. Stimuli were applied bilaterally to the facial skin, and participants provided separate yes/no responses for presence of stimulus-evoked pleasantness, unpleasantness and/or differences between sides. RESULTS: The stimuli were able to evoke sensations of pleasantness and unpleasantness with little differences in responses between the Q-tip and goat hair brush for the perceptions. Side-to-side differences in evoked perceptions were observed and greatest, when evaluating for pinprick-evoked unpleasantness (range between sessions = 18-19 participants). Acceptable percentage (≥90%) and excellent Cohen's Kappa (≥0.762) inter- and intra-rater agreements were identified for one or more positive responses for each stimulus modality and the targeted perception. CONCLUSION: The modified QualST protocol provides a simple, reproducible method for the investigation of perceptions of pleasantness and unpleasantness, with readily accessible instrumentation to dental professionals and allowing for a more holistic approach in somatosensory testing.

Clinical features of chronic primary pain in individuals presenting painful temporomandibular disorder and comorbidities.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of chronic primary pain (CPP), according to the recently released International Classification of Disease (ICD-11) criteria, refers to conditions with complex aetiologies. CPP is characterized by specific clinical features such as generalized sensory hypersensitivity and widespread pain, and is associated with functional disability and emotional distress. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated clinical features of CPP in individuals with painful temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and comorbidities (fibromyalgia, migraine and/or tension-type headache). METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted with a sample of 129 individuals. Painful TMD, fibromyalgia and primary headaches were evaluated based on well-established international criteria. Generalized sensory hypersensitivity was assessed using psychophysical tests. Symptoms of anxiety and depression were assessed by the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 and Patient Health Questionnaire-9. The Central Sensitization Inventory was applied to assess central sensitization-related symptoms and the Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index to evaluate the quality of sleep. The presence of widespread pain was assessed using a body map. The sample was stratified into three groups: control (n = 25), TMD-painful TMD only (n = 35) and TMD + Cm-painful TMD and comorbidities (n = 69). Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA, chi-squared test and ANCOVA, considering gender as a covariate (α = .05). RESULTS: Compared to controls, individuals presenting painful TMD and comorbidities showed lower pressure pain thresholds in all evaluated areas (p ≤ .012) and a higher number of painful areas in the body (p = .001). They presented more symptoms of anxiety (p = .040) and depression (p = .018), and a higher score in the Central Sensitization Inventory (p ≤ .006) than the other groups. CONCLUSION: Individuals with painful TMD and comorbidities presented more clinical features of CPP compared to those affected by TMD only.

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.

Orofacial pain for clinicians: A review of constant and attack-like facial pain syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Primary headache syndromes such as migraine are among the most common neurological syndromes. Chronic facial pain syndromes of non-odontogenic cause are less well known to neurologists despite being highly disabling. Given the pain localization, these patients often consult dentists first who may conduct unnecessary dental interventions even if a dental cause is not identified. Once it becomes clear that dental modalities have no effect on the pain, patients may be referred to another dentist or orofacial pain specialist, and later to a neurologist. Unfortunately, neurologists are also often not familiar with chronic orofacial pain syndromes although they share the neural system, i.e., trigeminal nerve and central processing areas for headache disorders. CONCLUSION: In essence, three broad groups of orofacial pain patients are important for clinicians: (i) Attack-like orofacial pain conditions, which encompass neuralgias of the cranial nerves and less well-known facial variants of primary headache syndromes; (ii) persistent orofacial pain disorders, including neuropathic pain and persistent idiopathic facial/dentoalveolar pain; and (iii) other differential diagnostically relevant orofacial pain conditions encountered by clinicians such as painful temporomandibular disorders, bruxism, sinus pain, dental pain, and others which may interfere (trigger) and overlap with headache. It is rewarding to know and recognize the clinical picture of these facial pain syndromes, given that, just like for headache, an internationally accepted classification system has been published and many of these syndromes can be treated with medications generally used by neurologists for other pain syndromes.

Nocebo response in dentistry: A systematic review and meta-analysis of adverse events in analgesic trials of third molar removal.

BACKGROUND: The nocebo response refers to the phenomenon where non-specific factors, including negative verbal suggestion and treatment expectations, cause adverse events (AE) following a placebo treatment. Non-specific factors are also likely to influence AE occurrence following administration of active pharmacological treatments. OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aimed to estimate the nocebo response in dentistry by assessing the AEs prevalence in placebo- and active arms of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing analgesic treatment following third molar (M3) surgery. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Eligible studies had to report the number of patients experiencing at least one drug-related AE (patients with AE ≥ 1) separately for the active and placebo arms. The proportion of patients with AE ≥ 1 and drug-related dropouts were pooled, and risk differences (RDs) between patients in the placebo- and active arm were calculated. RESULTS: In 50 independent RCTs of 47 identified articles, the pooled rates of patients with AE ≥ 1 were 22.8% in the placebo arm and 20.6% in the active arm. The pooled rates of drug-related dropout were 0.24% in the placebo arm and 0.08% in the active arm. There were no significant RDs in patients with AE ≥ 1 and drug-related dropouts. CONCLUSION: These results show that patients in the placebo arm reported AEs to the same extent as patients receiving active treatment, suggesting that most AEs in analgesic medication following M3 surgery may be attributed to the nocebo phenomenon.

What is the nocebo effect and does it apply to dentistry?-A narrative review.

BACKGROUND: Evidence for the nocebo effect, a phenomenon characterised by suboptimal treatment efficacy, worsening of symptoms, or the occurrence of adverse events caused by an individual's negative treatment expectations, is growing across a multitude of medical fields. However, little attention has been paid to patients' negative expectations and the nocebo effect within dentistry. AIM: This review summarises essential evidence of the nocebo phenomenon especially in relation to pain and drug administration. Subsequently, an overview of the current evidence of the nocebo phenomenon in the dental field is presented. METHODS: A PubMed search was performed using keywords related to "nocebo," "placebo," "expectations," and "dentistry." In addition to the articles selected from the search, placebo/nocebo researchers and dental researchers added important references from their respective fields. RESULTS: Although research on the nocebo effect in dentistry is limited, available current evidence suggests that the factors, which is related to the nocebo effect are likely to play a role in dental practice. CONCLUSION: Preliminary evidence from the review warrants further investigation into the nocebo effect in dentistry. Finally, based on the general knowledge of the nocebo effect, the review indicates fruitful arrays of research into the nocebo effect in dentistry.

Defining pleasant touch stimuli: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Pleasantness is generally overlooked when investigating tactile functions. Addition of a pleasant stimulus could allow for a more complete characterisation of somatosensory function. The aims of this review were to systematically assess the methodologies used to elicit a pleasant sensation, measured via psychophysical techniques, and to perform a meta-analysis to measure the effect of brush stroking velocity on touch pleasantness. Eighteen studies were included in the systematic review, with five studies included in the meta-analysis. The review found that factors such as texture, velocity, force, and the duration of continuous stroking influence tactile evoked pleasantness. Specifically, using a soft material and stroking at a velocity of 3 cm/s with light force is generally considered as particularly pleasant. The meta-analysis showed that a brush stroking velocity of 30 cm/s was rated as less pleasant than 3 cm/s, on the forearm. The present study collates the factors that are most likely to provide a stimulus to elicit a pleasant sensation. The results should be important for studies requiring a well-defined pleasant stimulus including neurosensory assessment protocols, allowing for a more complete multimodality assessment of somatosensory function.

A conceptual model of oro-facial health with an emphasis on function.

The individual inclination to lead an autonomous life until death is associated with requirements that may be of physiological, psychosocial and environmental nature. We aim to describe a conceptual oro-facial health model with an emphasis on oro-facial function, taking the domains of quality of life and patient-centred values into account. In the context of oro-facial function, the requirements of life are met when the oro-facial system is in a fit state. 'Fitness of the oro-facial system, that is oro-facial health, is a state that is characterised by an absence of, or positive coping with physical disease, mental disease, pain and negative environmental and social factors. It will allow natural oro-facial functions such as sensing, tasting, touching, biting, chewing, swallowing, speaking, yawning, kissing and facial expression'. In the presented conceptual model of oro-facial health, it is postulated that each individual has present and future potentials related to biological prerequisites and resources that are developed by an individual through the course of life. These potentials form the oro-facial functional capacity. When the individual potentials together do not meet the requirements of life anymore, dysfunction and disease result. The oro-facial system is subject to physiological ageing processes, which will inevitably lead to a decrease in the oro-facial functional capacity. Furthermore, comorbid medical conditions might hamper oro-facial function and, alongside with the ageing process, may lead to a state of oral hypofunction. Currently, there is a lack of widespread, validated, easy-to-use instruments that help to distinguish between states of oro-facial fitness as opposed to oral hypofunction. Clearly, research is needed to establish adequate, validated instruments alongside with functional rehabilitation procedures.

Painful and non-painful symptoms evoked by experimental bracing and thrusting of the mandible in healthy individuals.

BACKGROUND: Bruxism may involve bracing and thrusting of the mandible, in addition to clenching or grinding of the teeth. It is unclear how bracing and thrusting may contribute to potential musculoskeletal symptoms associated with bruxism. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of experimental bracing and thrusting of the mandible on the development of musculoskeletal symptoms in healthy volunteers. METHODS: Thirty healthy volunteers performed six trials of 5 min of repeated bracing and thrusting of the mandible. Bracing involved forcefully maintaining maximum protruded position (5 s with 1 s rest in between), whereas thrusting involved forcefully moving the mandible in a forward direction and back (1 Hz). The participants rated pain, unpleasantness, soreness, fatigue, tension, stiffness, stress and headache on 10-cm visual analogue scales (VAS) before, immediately and 24 h after the tasks. Pain drawings were obtained and maximum voluntary protrusive force (MVPF) was determined before and after the tasks. The outcome parameters for each task were compared between the time points. RESULTS: There was a significant increase in the VAS scores (2-4/10) of pain, unpleasantness, soreness, fatigue, tension, stiffness and stress immediately following the tasks compared to baseline and 24 h after the tasks (p < .008). Pain was frequently reported in masseter muscles. MVPF values were significantly higher immediately (p < .001) and 24 h after thrusting (p < .001) and bracing (p = .012) tasks compared to the baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Experimental bracing and thrusting of the mandible evoked transient, mild-to-moderate levels of muscle pain, fatigue, tension and stiffness and increased unpleasantness and stress scores in healthy volunteers.

Reliability of orofacial quantitative sensory testing for pleasantness and unpleasantness.

BACKGROUND: Quantitative sensory testing protocols for perceptions of pleasantness and unpleasantness based on the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain protocol were recently introduced. However, there are no reliability studies yet published. AIM: To evaluate the intra-examiner (test-retest) and inter-examiner reliability for orofacial pleasantness and unpleasantness quantitative sensory testing protocols. METHODS: Sixteen healthy participants from Aarhus University (11 women and five men, mean age 24, range 21-26 years) contributed. Two examiners were trained in performing the entire quantitative sensory testing protocols for pleasantness and unpleasantness, which included the additional dynamic tactile stimulation test using a goat-hair brush. Each participant underwent examination of both protocols by each examiner (inter-examiner reliability) on day 1. They returned at least 8 days following the testing to be re-examined by one examiner (intra-examiner reliability). All testing was performed on the skin of the right mandibular mental region. The intraclass correlation (ICC) was used to determine reliability. RESULTS: For the protocol investigating pleasantness, the majority of parameters had good to excellent intra-examiner (11/14: Intraclass correlation 0.67-0.87) and inter-examiner (13/14: Intraclass correlation 0.62-0.96) reliabilities. Similarly, the protocol investigating unpleasantness had good to excellent intra-examiner (intraclass correlation 0.63-0.99) and inter-examiner (intraclass correlation 0.65-0.98) reliabilities for most (13/15) of the parameters. CONCLUSION: Intra and inter-examiner reliabilities in the majority of quantitative sensory testing parameters (apart from the summation ratio) investigating pleasantness and unpleasantness are acceptable when assessing somatosensory function of the orofacial region.Trial registration: NA.

Feasibility and reliability of intraorally evoked "nociceptive-specific" blink reflexes.

OBJECTIVES: The "nociceptive-specific" blink reflex (nBR) evoked by extraoral stimulation has been used to assess trigeminal nociceptive processing in patients with trigeminal nerve damage regardless of the site of damage. This study aimed to test the feasibility of nBR elicited by intraoral stimulation, compare intraoral and extraoral nBR and assess the intrarater and interrater reliability of the intraoral nBR for the maxillary (V2) and mandibular (V3) branches of the trigeminal nerve. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 17 healthy participants, nBR was elicited by stimulation of two extraoral and two intraoral sites by two operators and repeated intraorally by one operator. Main outcome variables were intraoral stimulus-evoked pain scores and nBR R2 responses at different stimulus intensities. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to assess reliability. RESULTS: Dependent on the stimulus intensity, intraoral stimulation evoked R2 responses in up to 12/17 (70.6%) participants for V2 and up to 8/17 (47.1%) participants for V3. Pain scores (p < 0.003) and R2 responses (p < 0.004) increased with increasing intensities for V2, but not V3. The R2 responses were significantly smaller with intraoral stimulation compared to extraoral stimulation (p < 0.014). Overall, ICCs were fair to excellent for V2 but poor for V3. CONCLUSION: Intraorally evoked nBR was feasible in a subset of healthy participants and was less responsive than nBR with extraoral stimulation. The V2 nBR showed better reliability than V3. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The nBR can be used to assess nerve damage to the maxillary intraoral regions, though other measures may need to be considered for the mandibular intraoral regions.

Modulation of experimental facial pain via somatosensory stimuli targeting sensations of different valence.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of pain modulation from oro-facial somatosensory stimuli with different valence (pleasant-unpleasant) is limited. OBJECTIVES: To investigate (a) the modulatory effects of painful, pleasant and unpleasant somatosensory stimuli on two models of experimental facial pain, (b) whether modulation could be changed by blocking peripheral nerves via application of a local anaesthetic, EMLA, or blocking endogenous opioid receptors via naltrexone and (c) whether pain ratings were significantly correlated with participant psychological profiles. METHODS: Thirty-eight healthy women received experimental facial skin burning pain or jaw myalgia for four randomised sessions on different days. The painful region was stimulated with mechanical or thermal painful, pleasant, unpleasant and control stimuli, with ratings recorded before and during stimulation. Sessions differed in pre-treatment: EMLA/naltrexone/placebo tablet/cream. RESULTS: Significant effects of thermal or mechanical stimuli (P < .017), but not session (P > .102), were found on pain ratings for both models. In myalgia, painful cold resulted in a greater reduction in pain ratings than unpleasant cold, pleasant cold, control and pleasant warmth (P < .004). Decreases in pain ratings from painful, unpleasant and pleasant mechanical stimuli were greater than control (P < .002). In burning pain, painful cold resulted in a greater reduction in pain ratings than all but one of the other thermal stimuli (P < .033). The pleasant mechanical stimulus reduced pain ratings more than all other mechanical stimuli (P ≤ .003). There were no significant correlations between pain and psychometrics. CONCLUSION: Valence-targeted thermal and mechanical stimuli modulated experimental myalgia and skin burning pain (P < .017). Partially blocking peripheral afferents or opioid receptors did not affect modulation.

Topical anaesthesia degree is reduced in temporomandibular disorders patients: A novel approach to assess underlying mechanisms of the somatosensory alterations.

BACKGROUND: Changes in quantitative sensory testing (QST) parameters following topical anaesthesia could contribute to better elucidate underlying mechanisms of somatosensory alterations in temporomandibular disorder (TMD) pain patients. This placebo-controlled crossover investigation compared the somatosensory profile following topical anaesthesia between TMD patients (n = 20) and healthy participants (n = 20). METHODS: Cold detection threshold, warm detection threshold, cold pain threshold, heat pain threshold, mechanical detection threshold, mechanical pain threshold, wind-up ratio and pressure pain threshold were assessed on the skin overlying the masseter at three consecutive days (baseline and immediately after lidocaine 4%/placebo cream). Mixed ANOVA and a coding system that accounts for the diversity of types of peripheral axons associated with the somatosensory parameters were applied for data analysis. RESULTS: The lidocaine application caused no changes in the somatosensory sensitivity in the masseter region in TMD patients (P > .050), but sensitivity to cold, cold pain, touch and pinprick stimuli were reduced after topical anaesthesia in healthy participants (P < .050). Also, the degree of topical anaesthesia was greater in healthy participants (P = .008). The coding system suggested that TMD patients presented only Aδ-fibre block, whereas a combination of either Aß- and/or C-fibre block was observed in 35% of healthy participants in addition to Aδ-fibre block following lidocaine application. CONCLUSION: Quantitative sensory testing can be successfully applied to identify meaningful differences in the degree of hypoalgesia and hypoesthesia following short-time topical anaesthesia.

Consensus-based clinical guidelines for ambulatory electromyography and contingent electrical stimulation in sleep bruxism.

As yet, there are still no evidence-based clinical diagnostic and management guidelines for ambulatory single-channel EMG devices, like the BUTLER® GrindCare® (GrindCare), that are used in patients with sleep bruxism. Therefore, a consensus meeting was organised with GrindCare developers, researchers, and academic and non-academic clinicians experienced with the use of ambulatory EMG devices. The aim of the meeting was to discuss and develop recommendations for clinical guidelines for GrindCare usage, based on the existing clinical and research experience of the consensus meeting's participants. As an important outcome of the consensus meeting, clinical guidelines were proposed in which an initial 2-week baseline phase with the device in its inactive (non-stimulus) mode for habituation and assessment of the number of jaw-muscle activities is followed by a 4-week active phase with contingent electrical stimuli suppressing the jaw-muscle activities. As to avoid the commonly reported reduction in sensitivity to the stimuli, a 2-week inactive phase is subsequently installed, followed by a repetition of active and inactive phases until a lasting reduction in the number of jaw-muscle activities and/or associated complaints has been achieved. This proposal has the characteristics of a single-patient clinical trial. From a research point of view, adoption of this approach by large numbers of GrindCare users creates a great opportunity to recruit relatively large numbers of study participants that follow the same protocol.

Quantitative and qualitative assessment of sensory changes induced by local anesthetics block of two different trigeminal nerve branches.

OBJECTIVES: The aims were to use different techniques to assess the degree of sensory changes and magnitude of perceived size changes in the facial region induced by nerve blocks of two different trigeminal nerve branches in healthy participants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This placebo-controlled study included 30 healthy volunteers. The participants underwent quantitative and qualitative sensory testing (QST and QualST) thrice: before, 10 min, and 2 h after mental (n = 15) and infraorbital (n = 15) nerve blocks and during control (saline) sessions. Perceived numbness, temperature changes, and perceptual distortion were also measured at all time points during the nerve block and control sessions. Differences in outcome parameters between the sessions and time points were analyzed using analyses of variance and McNemar's tests. RESULTS: There was a significant degree of sensory loss to most QST and all QualST parameters, with significant numbness and increased perceived size at the injection site 10 min and 2 h after the nerve blocks compared with saline (P < 0.030) and the baseline (P < 0.042). Two hours after the nerve blocks, the sensitivity was significantly closer to baseline than after 10 min to most of the QST parameters (P < 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: QST and QualST revealed that the nerve blocks in the orofacial region resulted in complete or partial blockade of afferent nerve fibers mediating thermal and mechanical function for more than 2 h with significant numbness and perceptual distortion. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Both QST and QualST can provide information on the degree of blockade of afferent nerve fibers after nerve blocks in the orofacial region.

To what extent is bruxism associated with musculoskeletal signs and symptoms? A systematic review.

The aim of the present systematic review was to answer the overall research question: "To what extent is bruxism associated with musculoskeletal signs and symptoms?". The review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. A PubMed search of articles published until 23 November 2017 was conducted. The search string included both MeSH terms and text words. Results were presented in categories according to study design, study population (eg, adults, children), bruxism sub-type (awake, sleep), assessment methods for bruxism and musculoskeletal symptoms (self-report, validated test) and type of outcome (pain, non-painful musculoskeletal symptoms). It could be concluded that bruxism is to some extent associated with musculoskeletal symptoms, even though the evidence is conflicting and seems to be dependent on many factors, such as age, whether the bruxism occurs during sleep or wakefulness, and also the quality of the diagnostic methodology regarding bruxism and musculoskeletal signs and symptoms. The literature does not support a direct linear causal relationship between bruxism and such symptoms, but points more in the direction of a multifaceted relationship dependent on the presence of other risk factors. Pain is by far the most commonly assessed symptom, whereas non-painful musculoskeletal symptoms have generally not been systematically evaluated. In the light of recent findings indicating that non-painful symptoms may precede TMD pain, it is suggested to increase the scientific focus on non-painful musculoskeletal symptoms in future studies. Also, future studies should use validated methods for case definition and outcome assessments.

Neuropathic orofacial pain: Facts and fiction.

Definition and taxonomy This review deals with neuropathic pain of traumatic origin affecting the trigeminal nerve, i.e. painful post-traumatic trigeminal neuropathy (PTTN). Symptomatology The clinical characteristics of PTTN vary considerably, partly due to the type and extent of injury. Symptoms involve combinations of spontaneous and evoked pain and of positive and negative somatosensory signs. These patients are at risk of going through unnecessary dental/surgical procedures in the attempt to eradicate the cause of the pain, due to the fact that most dentists only rarely encounter PTTN. Epidemiology Overall, approximately 3% of patients with trigeminal nerve injuries develop PTTN. Patients are most often female above the age of 45 years, and both physical and psychological comorbidities are common. Pathophysiology PTTN shares many pathophysiological mechanisms with other peripheral neuropathic pain conditions. Diagnostic considerations PTTN may be confused with one of the regional neuralgias or other orofacial pain conditions. For intraoral PTTN, early stages are often misdiagnosed as odontogenic pain. Pain management Management of PTTN generally follows recommendations for peripheral neuropathic pain. Expert opinion International consensus on classification and taxonomy is urgently needed in order to advance the field related to this condition.

Reliability of the nociceptive blink reflex evoked by electrical stimulation of the trigeminal nerve in humans.

OBJECTIVE: The nociceptive blink reflex (nBR) can be useful to investigate trigeminal nociceptive function. The aim of this study was to estimate the reliability of the nBR evoked by electrical stimulation of the three branches of the trigeminal nerve under the following conditions: over time (test-retest and intrarater reliability) and by two examiners (interrater reliability). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-one healthy participants were evaluated in two sessions (24 h apart). The nBR was elicited by a so-called "nociceptive-specific" electrode placed over the entry zone of the right supraorbital (V1R), infraorbital (V2R), mental (V3R), and left infraorbital (V2L) nerve. The outcomes were individual electrical sensory (I 0) and pain thresholds (I P); root mean square (RMS), area-under-the-curve (AUC), and onset latencies of R2 responses (determined twice after a recalibration session); and stimulus-evoked pain on a 0-10 numerical rating scale. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Kappa statistics were computed (α = 5%). RESULTS: ICCs were fair to excellent in 82% of the psychophysical measures (fair 21%, good 31%, excellent 30%) and in 86% of V1R, V2R, and V2L nBR parameters, whereas 52% of V3R showed poor reliability. ICCs for intrarater reliability were fair to good in 70% of measurements (fair 20%, good 50%) and in 75% of interrater measurements after the recalibration (fair 55%, good 20%). All kappa values showed at least fair agreement and the majority of the nBR measures (93%) presented moderate to excellent reliability. CONCLUSION: The nBR and its associated psychophysical measures can be considered a sufficiently reliable test. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The nBR can be recommended as an electrophysiological technique to assess trigeminal nociceptive function.

Perceptual distortion of the tongue by lingual nerve block and topical application of capsaicin in healthy women.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine reports of perceptual distortion evoked by transient deafferentation and burning pain as models of aspects of burning mouth syndrome (BMS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixteen healthy women took part in three experimental sessions that included exposure to lingual nerve block, capsaicin, and control substance. In each session, reported perceptual distortion and mechanical detection threshold (MDT) were assessed at four areas (the tongue, lower front teeth, lower lip, and right thumb) before and at 5, 15, 30 min and 1 and 3 h after the injection or application. A numerical rating scale (NRS) and a template matching procedure were used to quantify the perceptual distortions. RESULTS: There was a significantly higher MDT on the tongue during the lingual nerve block session at 5 min up until 1 h, with the perceived tongue size significantly increased at 5, 15, and 30 min and at 1 h compared to baseline (P < 0.05). Although the perceived size determined by the NRS scores during the capsaicin session was significantly larger for the lower lip at 5 min compared to baseline (P < 0.001), there were no significant effects on the MDT or the perceived sizes for the tongue, lower front teeth, or right thumb at any of the time points. CONCLUSIONS: Perceptual distortions of the tongue may be influenced by non-nociceptive somatosensory changes rather than nociceptive activity. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The perceptual distortion of the tongue was investigated with models of aspects of BMS and may have implications for future studies in clinical populations.