Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Oral Rehabil ; 45(5): 414-422, 2018 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29446485

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature for studies that assessed the effects of glucosamine supplements (GS) on pain and maximum mouth opening (MMO) restriction compared to other therapies, placebo or no intervention on painful temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJ OA). Randomised controlled trials were selected in a two-phase process. Seven electronic databases, in addition to three grey literature databases, were searched. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. Twelve potentially eligible studies were identified, from which three were finally included. Furthermore, two were categorised at low risk and one at high risk of bias. Intervention groups were treated with glucosamine-sulphate, while controls were treated with placebo or ibuprofen. In two studies, GS were equally effective regarding pain reduction and mouth opening improvement compared to ibuprofen taken two or three times a day over 12 weeks; however, one study did not find significant differences in follow-up evaluations concerning these clinical variables in both glucosamine and placebo groups administered over six weeks. There is very low evidence regarding GS therapeutic effects on TMJ OA. Considering a follow-up of 12 weeks, GS were as effective as ibuprofen taken two or three times a day. However, over six weeks of medication intake, GS were not superior to placebo. Still, included studies presented major drawbacks, and therefore, conclusions must be interpreted with caution.


Subject(s)
Arthralgia/drug therapy , Glucosamine/therapeutic use , Osteoarthritis/drug therapy , Temporomandibular Joint/drug effects , Arthralgia/physiopathology , Dietary Supplements , Humans , Osteoarthritis/physiopathology , Pain Measurement , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Temporomandibular Joint/physiopathology , Treatment Outcome
2.
J Oral Rehabil ; 44(9): 722-734, 2017 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28477392

ABSTRACT

This systematic review and meta-analysis (MA) aimed to evaluate the diagnostic validity of questionnaires, clinical assessment and portable diagnostic devices compared to the reference standard method polysomnography (PSG) in assessing sleep bruxism (SB). Two reviewers searched electronic databases for diagnostic test accuracy studies that compared questionnaires, clinical assessment or portable diagnostic devices for SB, with the reference standard method PSG, comprising previous studies from all languages and with no restrictions regarding age, gender or time of publication. Of the 351 articles, eight met the inclusion criteria for qualitative, and seven for quantitative analysis. The methodology of selected studies was evaluated using the Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2). The studies were divided and analysed over three groups: three studies evaluating questionnaires, two regarding the clinical assessment of tooth wear and three covering portable diagnostic devices. The MA indicated that portable diagnostic devices showed the best validity of all evaluated methods, especially as far as a four-channel EMG/ECG recording is concerned. Questionnaires and the clinical assessment can be used as screening methods to identify non-SB individuals, although it is not that good in identifying subjects with SB. The quality of evidence identified through GRADEpro, was from very low-to-moderate, due to statistical heterogeneity between studies.


Subject(s)
Electromyography , Polysomnography , Sleep Bruxism/diagnosis , Humans , Patient Selection , Reference Standards , Reproducibility of Results , Sensitivity and Specificity , Sleep Bruxism/physiopathology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL