Focus Groups to Inform the Development of a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) for Temporomandibular Joint Disorders (TMDs).

BACKGROUND: Understanding symptoms of temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs) can help doctors and patients document, monitor, and manage the disease and help researchers evaluate interventions. Patients with TMDs experience symptoms ranging from mild to severe, primarily in the head and neck region. This study describes findings from formative patient focus groups to capture, categorize, and prioritize symptoms of TMDs towards the development of a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). METHODS: We conducted ten focus groups with 40 men and women with mild, moderate, and severe TMD. Focus groups elicited descriptions of symptoms and asked participants to review a list of existing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from the literature and patient advisor input and speak to how those PROs reflect their own experience, including rating their importance. RESULTS: We identified 52 distinct concepts across six domains: somatic, physical, social, sexual, affective, and sleep. Focus groups identified the ability to chew and eat; clicking, popping, and other jaw noises; jaw pain and headaches; jaw misalignment or dislocation; grinding, clenching, or chewing, including at night; and ear sensations as most important. Participants with severe TMDs more often reported affective concepts like depression and shame than did participants with mild or moderate TMDs. CONCLUSION: Findings support PROM item development for TMDs, including selecting existing PROMs or developing new ones that reflect patients' lived experiences, priorities, and preferred terminology. Such measures are needed to increase understanding of TMDs, promote accurate diagnosis and effective treatment, and help advance research on TMDs.

Patients with temporomandibular joint disorders, or TMDs, have pain and other problems in their jaw, and face and neck areas. We talked to 40 patients with mild, moderate, and severe TMDs to learn about their symptoms. We also asked patients to review a list of TMD symptoms. They then chose the most important ones based on their experience. The data showed 52 TMD symptoms and functions across six domains. The patients chose the ability to chew and eat; clicking, popping, and other jaw noises; and jaw pain and headaches as most important. They also chose jaw misalignment or dislocation; grinding, clenching, or chewing, including at night; and ear feelings as important. Findings support creating patient-reported outcome measures, or PROMs, for TMDs. These PROMs should reflect patients' experiences and what is most important to them. Such measures can help doctors treat TMDs and help advance research on TMDs.

Patient-reported outcome measures for individuals with temporomandibular joint disorders: a systematic review and evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: We used consensus-based, systematic protocols to evaluate the reliability and validity of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for use in documenting treatment outcomes for temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). STUDY DESIGN: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we conducted a focused search of 5 literature databases resulting in a yield of 445 articles that qualified for full-text review. Our review identified 124 PROMs, from which we selected 19 directly related to symptoms of TMD including temporomandibular joint (TMJ) function. RESULTS: We abstracted data on 9 Consensus-based Standards of the selection of health Measurements INstruments (COSMIN) measurement properties and analyzed these data according to COSMIN criteria. Only 3 PROMs provided evidence for at least half of the COSMIN properties: Eight-item Jaw Function Limitations Scale, Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP)-TMD (OHIP-TMD), and TMJ Ankylosis Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire. Only the OHIP-TMD provided evidence for properties essential to evaluating change over time: reliability, measurement error, and responsiveness. CONCLUSION: We believe these results can alert clinical practitioners to gaps in our knowledge about the most widely used PROMs in TMD practice, and identify topics requiring further study for clinical researchers.

Conceptual Framework for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Clinical Trials of Skeletal Muscle Cramping Experienced in Dialysis: A Kidney Health Initiative Workgroup Report.

Skeletal muscle cramping is a common and bothersome symptom for patients on maintenance dialysis therapy, regardless of modality, and it has not been prioritized for innovative assessments or treatments. Research to prevent or treat skeletal muscle cramping in patients receiving dialysis is hindered by poorly understood pathophysiology, lack of an accepted definition, and the absence of a standardized measurement method. The Kidney Health Initiative, a public-private partnership between the American Society of Nephrology and US Food and Drug Administration, convened a multidisciplinary workgroup to define a set of patient-reported outcome measures for use in clinical trials to test the effect of new dialysis devices, new KRTs, lifestyle/behavioral modifications, and medications on skeletal muscle cramping. Upon determining that foundational work was necessary, the workgroup undertook a multistep process to elicit concepts central to developing the basis for demonstrating content validity of candidate patient-reported outcome measures for skeletal muscle cramping in patients on dialysis. The workgroup sought to (1) create an accepted, patient-endorsed definition for skeletal muscle cramping that applies to all dialysis modalities, (2) construct a conceptual model for developing and evaluating a skeletal muscle cramping-specific patient-reported outcome measure, and (3) identify potential questions from existing patient-reported outcome measures that could be modified or adapted and subsequently tested in the dialysis population. We report the results of the workgroup's efforts, provide our recommendations, and issue a call to action to address the gaps in knowledge and research needs we identified. These action steps are urgently needed to quantify skeletal muscle cramping burden, assess the effect, and measure meaningful changes of new interventions to improve the experience of patients receiving dialysis and suffering from skeletal muscle cramping.

Policy responses to COVID-19 present a window of opportunity for a paradigm shift in global health policy: An application of the Multiple Streams Framework as a heuristic.

Drawing on Kingdon's Multiple Streams Framework as a heuristic, this article reviews the three streams - problems, policies, and politics - as applied to the adoption of economic policies in response to the socioeconomic impacts of COVID-19. In doing so, we argue that we are currently presented with a window of opportunity to better address the social determinants of health. First, through assessing the problem stream, an understanding of inequity as a problem gained wider recognition through the disproportionate impacts of COVID-19. Second, in the policy stream, we demonstrate that appropriate and unprecedented policies can be enacted even in the face of changing evidence or evidentiary uncertainty, which are needed to address upstream factors that influence health. Lastly, in the politics stream, we demonstrate that addressing a public health 'problem' can be well-received by the public, making it politically viable. However, it is important to ensure the 'problem' is clearly relayed to the public and that this information is not perceived to change, as this can undermine trust. The social, political, and behavioural lessons presented by the COVID-19 pandemic should be drawn on in this pivotal moment for global public health.

Utilizing asynchronous email interviews for health research: overview of benefits and drawbacks.

OBJECTIVE: Through collating observations from various studies and complementing these findings with one author's study, a detailed overview of the benefits and drawbacks of asynchronous email interviewing is provided. Through this overview, it is evident there is great potential for asynchronous email interviews in the broad field of health, particularly for studies drawing on expertise from participants in academia or professional settings, those across varied geographical settings (i.e. potential for global public health research), and/or in circumstances when face-to-face interactions are not possible (e.g. COVID-19). RESULTS: Benefits of asynchronous email interviewing and additional considerations for researchers are discussed around: (i) access transcending geographic location and during restricted face-to-face communications; (ii) feasibility and cost; (iii) sampling and inclusion of diverse participants; (iv) facilitating snowball sampling and increased transparency; (v) data collection with working professionals; (vi) anonymity; (vii) verification of participants; (viii) data quality and enhanced data accuracy; and (ix) overcoming language barriers. Similarly, potential drawbacks of asynchronous email interviews are also discussed with suggested remedies, which centre around: (i) time; (ii) participant verification and confidentiality; (iii) technology and sampling concerns; (iv) data quality and availability; and (v) need for enhanced clarity and precision.