Minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit in patients with chronic temporomandibular disorders.

BACKGROUND: Research on temporomandibular disorder (TMD) responsiveness is scarce and limited regarding patients' representativeness. OBJECTIVE(S): This study aimed to estimate minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) among a large and diverse patient population regarding sex and age. METHODS: In this study, 162 patients participated from five hospitals. MCID and SCB in pain, functional disability and quality of life were examined with anchor-based methods. Patients' global impression of change was used as the anchor. Area under the curve (AUC) values were determined for testing accuracy. Changes from baseline and coefficient of variation by responsiveness status were calculated to explain the results of accuracy. RESULTS: SCB was estimated to be 2.18 for the numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain (AUC: 0.80 [95% CI: 0.72-0.88]) in all patients and 2.50 in women (AUC: 0.81 [95% CI: 0.71-0.89]). The estimated SCB of NRS for discomfort (1.50) and Jaw Functional Limitation Scale for mastication (1.35) had wide CIs for AUCs. Likewise, the estimated MCIDs of NRS for pain (0.80) and NRS for discomfort (1.50) had wide CIs for AUCs. Among non-responders who did not achieve the MCID of NRS for pain, the coefficient of variation was very high for all outcomes other than the NRS for pain. CONCLUSION: This study investigated the responsiveness of patients with TMD using a large and diverse patient sample. SCB in pain decrease can be used to assess the responsiveness of patients with TMD. Composite outcomes should be developed to estimate MCID.

Effectiveness of Chuna (or Tuina) Manual Therapy for Temporomandibular Disorder: A Systematic Review.

Background: Temporomandibular disorder (TMD) affects patients' quality of life (QoL) because of the resulting structural and functional impairment and pain. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the evidence regarding the effectiveness, safety and improvement in QoL in patients who underwent Chuna manual therapy (CMT) for TMD. Methods: We searched 11 databases and included randomized controlled trials (RCT) on CMT for TMD published before March 2020. A meta-analysis was conducted, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) method was used to evaluate the evidence level. We included 12 RCTs that compared CMT and conventional care. Results: CMT showed significantly better patient pain reduction, functional improvement and QoL. A superior result was seen in the use of CMT in conjunction with Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) or conventional care. CMT showed no minor or serious adverse events compared with medical treatments. The evidence level was low for all outcomes, except QoL. Conclusions: We found that CMT for TMD resulted in functional improvement, pain reduction and improvement in QoL, with fewer adverse events. However, since the evidence level varied from very low to moderate due to imprecision and the risk of bias with the included studies, we are limited in determining the efficacy of Chuna therapy using these studies. High-quality, well-designed and large-scale RCTs are needed to conclusively determine the clinical efficacy of CMT in TMD.

External Application of Herbal Medicines for Acne Vulgaris: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis.

AIM OF THE STUDY: The objective of this systematic review is to critically evaluate the evidence of the effectiveness and safety of external application of herbal medicines (EAHM) for acne vurgalis (AV). METHODS: English, Chinese and Korean language databases were searched up to May 2018. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that reported the effects of EAHM for AV were included and analysed. RESULTS: A total of 10 randomized trials with 656 AV patients were identified. A meta-analysis of two RCTs indicated that EAHM had a significant effect on improving primary outcome 'global assessment' compared with placebo (mean difference (MD) = -2.62, confidence interval (CI) = -4.84 to -0.40, p = 0.02). Furthermore, data extracted from two RCTs showed that EAHM significantly reduce primary outcome 'inflammatory lesion count of acne' (MD = -1.25, CI = -1.68 to -0.83, p < 0.00001) and 'non-inflammatory lesion count of acne' (MD = -1.32, CI = -1.75 to -0.90, p < 0.00001). No significant difference was observed between groups in secondary outcome 'sebum of skin' (MD = -0.21, CI = -0.53 to 0.11, p = 0.20) and 'patient-reported changes in symptom' (relative risk (RR) = 2.56, CI = 0.43 to 15.22, p = 0.30). No severe adverse events (AEs) were found and no treatment was stopped due to AEs of EAHM. CONCLUSIONS: EAHM seems to have affirmative effects, but quality of evidence, and non-standardized use of EAHM make our conclusion weak. Our suggestion is rigorously designed RCTs and standardization of EAHM are required in the future.

External Use of Propolis for Oral, Skin, and Genital Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Objective. The aim of this review is to provide the available evidence on the external use of propolis (EUP) for oral, skin, and genital diseases. Method. We searched twelve electronic databases for relevant studies up to June 2016. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included and analysed. Results. Of the 286 articles identified, twelve potentially relevant studies met our inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of two studies on recurrent oral aphthae (ROA) indicated that there were no significant differences in total effective rate (TER) for pain disappearance between EUP and placebo groups (RR = 1.96, 95% CI = 0.97-3.98, and P = 0.06). In two studies on skin diseases, the combined treatment of EUP with other interventions revealed significant effects on the duration of treatment or TER. In one study on genital diseases, EUP showed significant differences in genital herpes outcome measures compared to placebo. Conclusions. Our results on the effectiveness of EUP for treating oral, skin, and genital diseases are not conclusive because of the low methodological qualities and small sample sizes. Further well-designed randomized controlled trials, with high quality and large samples for specific disorders, must be conducted to obtain firm conclusions.

Chuna (or Tuina) Manual Therapy for Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To review the literature and systematically evaluate the effectiveness of Chuna (or Tuina) manual therapy (C[T]MT) on pain and function for musculoskeletal disorders. METHODS: We searched 15 English, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean databases using relevant keywords. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of C(T)MT for musculoskeletal disorders were considered, and we limited analyses to studies with a low-risk bias for randomization and/or allocation concealment. RESULTS: Sixty-six RCTs with 6,170 participants were included. One sham-controlled RCT showed that C(T)MT relieved pain more effectively than a sham control (SMD -3.09 [-3.59, -2.59]). For active-controlled RCTs, pooled meta-analysis showed that C(T)MT had statistically significant effects on pain reduction, especially compared to traction (P < 0.00001), drugs (P = 0.04), and physical therapies (P < 0.0001). For functional improvement, combined effects of C(T)MT with drugs (P = 0.04) and traction (P = 0.05) also showed similar positive effects. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests that C(T)MT is safe and effective for pain reduction and functional improvement for musculoskeletal diseases; however, the evidence for functional improvement was not as strong as for pain reduction. For future studies, high-quality RCTs such as sham-controlled studies with standardized interventions are needed to provide sufficient evidence on the effects of C(T)MT for musculoskeletal diseases. Protocol registration number is CRD42016038307 04/07/2016.