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.

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.