Works of Illness and the Challenges of Social Risk and the Specter of Pain in the Lived Experience of TMD.

Temporomandibular Disorders (TMD) represent a particular form of chronic pain that, while not outwardly debilitating, profoundly impacts interactions as fundamental to human existence as smiling, laughing, speaking, eating, and intimacy. Our analysis, informed by an expanded "works of illness" assessment, draws attention to work surrounding social and physical risk. We refer to these as the work of stoicism and the work of vigilance and identify double binds created in contexts that call for both. Conflicting authorial stances in informants' narratives are shown to be essential in maintaining a positive identity in the face of illness. While earlier ethnographic studies report TMD sufferers' experience of stigma and search for diagnosis and legitimacy, we present a group of individuals who have accepted diagnosis at face value and soldier through pain as a fundamental aspect of their identity.

Report of the NIH Task Force on research standards for chronic low back pain.

OBJECTIVE: Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed non-specific, and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. DESIGN: Expert panel and preliminary evaluation of key recommendations. METHODS: The NIH Pain Consortium charged a Research Task Force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel developed a 3-stage process, each with a 2-day meeting. RESULTS: The panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimal data set to describe research subjects (drawing heavily on the PROMIS methodology); reporting "responder analyses" in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved the recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals. CONCLUSION: The RTF believes these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of chronic low back pain. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes. We expect the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document, and undergo continual improvement. PERSPECTIVE: A task force was convened by the NIH Pain Consortium with the goal of developing research standards for chronic low back pain. The results included recommendations for definitions, a minimum dataset, reporting outcomes, and future research. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes.

Focus article: report of the NIH Task Force on Research Standards for Chronic Low Back Pain.

UNLABELLED: Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed non-specific and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. Therefore, NIH Pain Consortium charged a Research Task Force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimum dataset to describe research participants (drawing heavily on the PROMIS methodology); reporting "responder analyses" in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved the recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals. The RTF believes that these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of chronic low back pain. We expect that the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document and undergo continual improvement. PERSPECTIVE: A task force was convened by the NIH Pain Consortium with the goal of developing research standards for chronic low back pain. The results included recommendations for definitions, a minimum dataset, reporting outcomes, and future research. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes.

Report of the National Institutes of Health task force on research standards for chronic low back pain.

OBJECTIVES: Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed nonspecific and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. The purpose of this article is to disseminate the report of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) task force on research standards for cLBP. METHODS: The NIH Pain Consortium charged a research task force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel developed a 3-stage process, each with a 2-day meeting. RESULTS: The panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimal data set to describe research subjects (drawing heavily on the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System methodology); reporting "responder analyses" in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved these recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals. CONCLUSIONS: The RTF believes that these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of cLBP. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes. We expect the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document and undergo continual improvement.

The Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders. IV: evaluation of psychometric properties of the Axis II measures.

AIMS: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) biobehavioral (Axis II) screening instruments. METHODS: Participants with Axis I TMD diagnoses (n = 626) completed the Axis II instruments (Depression, Nonspecific Physical Symptoms, Graded Chronic Pain) and other instruments assessing psychological distress, pain, and disability at three study sites. Internal consistency, temporal stability, and convergent/discriminant validity of the Axis II measures were assessed. To assess criterion validity of Nonspecific Physical Symptoms and Depression instruments as screeners, 170 participants completed a structured psychiatric diagnostic interview. RESULTS: The Axis II instruments showed very good to excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha coefficients = 0.80 to 0.95). Their convergent (correlation range 0.3 to 0.9) and discriminant (range 0.0 to 0.6) validity were generally supported, although Nonspecific Physical Symptoms was more strongly associated with depressive than with somatic symptoms. Temporal stability was high for characteristic pain intensity (Lin's correlation concordance coefficient [CCC] = 0.91), interference (CCC = 0.89), and chronic pain grade (weighted kappa = 0.87), and fair to good for Depression and Nonspecific Physical Symptoms (CCC = 0.63 to 0.78). The Depression instrument normal versus moderate to severe cutoff point was good at identifying current-year depression and dysthymia diagnoses (sensitivity 87%, specificity 53%). Nonspecific Physical Symptoms did not have high utility for detecting psychiatric disorders (sensitivity 86%, specificity 31%). CONCLUSION: The Axis-II Depression and Graded Chronic Pain instruments have clinically relevant and acceptable psychometric properties for reliability and validity and utility as instruments for identifying TMD patients with high levels of distress, pain, and disability that can interfere with treatment response and course of Axis I disorders.

Generalized joint hypermobility (GJH) may be a risk factor for temporomandibular disorders (TMD).

PURPOSE/QUESTION: The objective of this study was to determine whether generalized joint hypermobility is a risk factor for temporomandibular disorders as defined by the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD). SOURCE OF FUNDING: This study was supported by the Public Health Research Association, Saxony, Germany. TYPE OF STUDY/DESIGN: Population-based cross-sectional cohort study LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2: Limited-quality, patent-oriented evidence. STRENGTH OF RECOMMENDATION GRADE: Not applicable.

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Chronic Painful Temporomandibular Disorders.

The classification of temporomandibular disorders (TMD) has progressed substantially over the past 25 years owing to the strategic implementation of an initial classification system based on core taxonomic principles. In this article, we describe the development of the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) and its translation into the multidimensional Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations Innovations Opportunities and Networks-AAPT for chronic pain disorders. The initial scientific classification system (Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders) relied on a boot-strapping process that did not attempt to solve all known clinical problems but, rather, focused on problems that could be solved at that time. The core design principles included using epidemiologic data, operationalized concepts, reliable methods, and the incorporation of the biopsychosocial model into a dual axis system. This system led to sufficient data collection internationally that the system itself could be revised, first by critical evaluation of all aspects, second by review from invited experts, and third by the construction of a revised taxonomy (DC/TMD) that maintained the core design principles of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders. The resultant disorders with pain as a dominant feature exhibit substantial sensitivity and specificity, and they have been translated into the AAPT framework. The AAPT TMD criteria are part of an evidence-based classification system providing a systematic structure that includes 5 dimensions: diagnostic criteria, common features, comorbidities, consequences, and putative mechanisms. Future research will attempt to extend this AAPT domain from solely TMDs to include other orofacial pain conditions. PERSPECTIVE: The painful TMDs have well-established sensitivity and specificity, as based on the DC/TMD; their translation to the AAPT framework for chronic pain conditions provides a structure for consistent clinical application within the broader health care settings and for future research on the TMDs.

Clinical findings and psychosocial factors in patients with atypical odontalgia: a case-control study.

AIM: To provide a systematic description of clinical findings and psychosocial factors in patients suffering from atypical odontalgia (AO). METHODS: Forty-six consecutive AO patients (7 men and 39 women; mean age, 56 years; range, 31 to 81 years) were compared with 35 control subjects (11 men and 24 women; mean age, 59 years; range, 31 to 79 years). RESULTS: The pain of the AO patients was characterized by persistent, moderate pain intensity (mean, 5.6 +/- 1.9) with long pain duration (mean, 7.7 +/- 7.8 years). Eighty-three percent reported that onset of pain occurred in conjunction with dental treatment. No significant difference was found between the groups in number of remaining teeth or number of root fillings. Temporomandibular disorder (TMD) pain (P < .001), tension-type headache (P < .002), and widespread pain (P < .001) were significantly more common among AO patients than controls. Significantly higher scores for somatization (P < .01) and depression (P < .01) and limitations in jaw function (P < .001) were found for the AO group compared with the control group. Significant differences between groups were found in 4 general health domains: role-physical (P < .001), bodily pain (P < .001), vitality (P < .004), and social functioning (P < .001). CONCLUSION: A majority of the AO patients reported persistent, moderately intense intraoral pain that in most cases had an onset in conjunction with dental treatment. AO patients had more comorbid pain conditions and higher scores for depression and somatization. Significant limitation in jaw function and significantly lower scores on quality of life measures were found for AO patients compared with controls.

Translating the research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders into German: evaluation of content and process.

AIMS: To develop a German-language version of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) through a formal translation/back-translation process, to summarize available data about their psychometric properties, and to provide new data about psychometric testing of components of the RDC/TMD. METHODS: To cross-culturally adapt the instrument, the RDC/TMD were translated using a forward-backward method, except for measures of somatization and depression, because German-specific instruments of these already existed. The psychometric properties of the RDC/TMD were examined, and the literature on this topic was reviewed. RESULTS: The available literature about reliability of clinical examination methods (4 studies) showed at least acceptable results, with a median intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.60. Reliability of RDC/TMD components Jaw Disability List (JDL) and Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS) was sufficient (ICC for retest reliability [n = 27] was 0.76 for JDL and 0.92 for GCPS; Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency [n = 378] was 0.72 and 0.88, respectively). A priori hypothesized associations between GCPS or JDL summary scores and self-report of general health, oral health, oral health-related quality of life, or dysfunctional pain, which were measured by means of the Multidimensional Pain Inventory, were confirmed in a convenience sample of clinical TMD patients (n = 378). These correlations were interpreted as support for the validity of the GCPS and JDL. The original RDC/TMD include measures for somatization and depression (SCL-90-R); however, equivalent German instruments to assess these constructs ("Beschwerdenliste," "Allgemeine Depressionsskala") have well-established validity and reliability in the German cultural environment. CONCLUSION: The psychometric properties and international comparability of the German version of the RDC/TMD (RDC/TMD-G) make this instrument suitable for the assessment of TMD in Germany.

The efficacy of traditional, low-cost and nonsplint therapies for temporomandibular disorder: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment recommendations for patients with painful temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) range from conservative treatments such as physiotherapy to aggressive and irreversible treatments such as restorative reconstruction and joint surgery. METHODS: The authors randomized 200 subjects diagnosed with TMD into three groups: usual conservative, dentist-prescribed self-care treatment without any intraoral splint appliance (UT); UT plus a conventional flat-plane hard acrylic splint (HS); and UT plus a soft vinyl (a low-cost athletic mouth guard) splint (SS). Subjects completed questionnaires and clinical examinations at three, six and 12 months. RESULTS: The authors observed no significant differences among the groups in TMD-related pain levels or other common signs and symptoms of TMD at baseline (BL) or at any follow-up. The changes from BL were comparable for all three groups. The authors did not note any significant differences at any follow-up for compliance with study protocols or for occurrences of adverse effects from either splint type. For HS versus SS, there were significant differences in rates of splint use, but these differences were not accompanied by differences in either self-reported symptoms or in clinical findings. CONCLUSIONS: All patients improved over time, and traditional splint therapy offered no benefit over the SS splint therapy. Neither splint therapy provided a greater benefit than did self-care treatment without splint therapy. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: These findings suggest that clinicians who treat patients with TMD should consider prescribing low-cost nonsplint self-care therapy for most patients.

Reliability of clinical temporomandibular disorder diagnoses.

Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) diagnoses can be viewed as the most useful clinical summary for classifying subtypes of TMD. The Research Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (RDC/TMD) is the most widely used TMD diagnostic system for conducting clinical research. It has been translated into 18 languages and is used by a consortium of 45 RDC/TMD-based international researchers. While reliability of RDC/TMD signs and symptoms of TMD has been amply reported, the reliability of RDC/TMD diagnoses has not. The aim of the study was to determine the reliability of clinical TMD diagnoses using standardized methods and operational definitions contained in the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD). Data came from reliability assessment trials conducted at 10 international clinical centers, involving 30 clinical examiners assessing 230 subjects. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated to characterize the reliability. The reliability of the diagnoses was fair to good. Median ICCs for the diagnoses myofascial pain with and without limited opening were 0.51 and 0.60, respectively. Median ICC for arthralgia was 0.47 and 0.61 for disc displacement with reduction. RDC/TMD diagnoses of disc displacement without reduction, osteoarthritis and osteoarthrosis were not prevalent enough to calculate ICC's, but percent agreement was always >95%. The reliability of diagnostic classification improved when diagnoses were grouped into pain versus non-pain diagnoses (ICC=0.72) and for detecting any diagnosis versus no diagnosis (ICC=0.78). In clinical decision-making and research, arriving at a reliable diagnosis is critical in establishing a clinical condition and a rational approach to treatment. The RDC/TMD demonstrates sufficiently high reliability for the most common TMD diagnoses, supporting its use in clinical research and decision making.

Review of aetiological concepts of temporomandibular pain disorders: towards a biopsychosocial model for integration of physical disorder factors with psychological and psychosocial illness impact factors.

Several studies have reported that musculoskeletal disorders of the stomatognathic system, commonly known as temporomandibular disorders (TMD) resemble musculoskeletal disorders and chronic pain disorders in general. There is also general consensus that combined biomedical and biopsychosocial methods best support the assessment and management of the cardinal features of TMD, i.e., pain and dysfunction or physical (peripheral) and psychosocial (central) factors. This overview of the aetiology of TMD will outline conceptualizations of past models and present the current view that patients with TMD should be assessed according to both the physical disorder and the psychosocial illness impact factors. The conceptual theories outlined in this review include biomedical models related to temporomandibular joints, muscles of mastication and occlusal factors, psychological models and the biopsychosocial models. An integrated and multidimensional approach concerning physical and psychosocial factors in temporomandibular pain and dysfunction is presented as an example of how the biopsychosocial model and information processing theory may apply in the conceptualization and management of TMD for various health care professionals.

Cyclic effects on experimental pain response in women with temporomandibular disorders.

AIMS: Since cyclic effects on experimental pain response in women with temporomandibular disorders (TMD) have not been adequately studied, the aim of this study was to assess variations in experimental pain response at 4 phases of the menstrual cycle. METHODS: Eighteen normally cycling women with TMD, 25 women with TMD and taking oral contraceptives (OC), 25 normally cycling pain-free controls, and 26 pain-free controls taking OC underwent 3 experimental pain procedures at 4 phases during each of 3 menstrual cycles. These procedures included algometer palpations at fixed amounts of pressure and pressure pain thresholds at several body sites, and an ischemic arm pain task. Repeated measures analysis of variance was used to compare cycle phase, TMD group, and OC status differences in experimental pain response. RESULTS: Significant phase-related differences were seen for palpation intensity measures (P values < .05). Normally cycling women with TMD showed higher palpation pain intensity at menses and midluteal phases, while women with TMD taking OC showed stable palpation pain intensity ratings at menses, ovulatory, and midluteal phases, with increased intensity at the late luteal phase. TMD subjects had greater palpation pain and ischemic pain intensity and lower pressure pain thresholds compared to controls. CONCLUSION: Phase-related differences in experimental pain response were not strong and were more often found for experimental stimuli with greater clinical relevance (ie, palpation pain) compared with an ischemic pain task.

Musculoskeletal orofacial pain and other signs and symptoms of temporomandibular disorders during pregnancy: a prospective study.

AIMS: To describe the course of reported musculoskeletal pain in the temporomandibular region and other signs and symptoms of temporomandibular disorders (TMD) as well as psychological distress over the course of pregnancy and 1 year postpartum. METHODS: Women with musculoskeletal orofacial pain (n = 19) and pain-free comparison subjects (n = 16) in the first trimester of pregnancy were selected through records review from the population of a large health maintenance organization. Subjects completed a self-administered questionnaire assessing pain, depression, and somatic symptoms; provided a sample of whole unstimulated saliva; and underwent a standardized clinical examination during the third, sixth, and ninth months of pregnancy and 1 year postpartum. RESULTS: At baseline (third month of pregnancy), 16 of the 19 patients with musculoskeletal orofacial pain met criteria for an RDC/TMD diagnosis. Reported musculoskeletal orofacial pain diminished significantly during the second or third trimester of pregnancy and increased again postpartum. Measures of mandibular opening increased over pregnancy in both cases and comparison subjects and remained high postpartum. Depression and somatic symptoms changed little over the course of pregnancy but were substantially lowered at 1 year postpartum for both groups. As expected, subjects with pain had higher levels of palpation pain, diminished mandibular range of motion, and higher levels of psychological distress compared to subjects without orofacial pain. CONCLUSION: Musculoskeletal orofacial pain and related symptoms appear to improve over the course of pregnancy. This improvement occurs in the presence of increased joint laxity and is not paralleled by improvements in psychological distress. Thus, it was concluded that the improvement in pain is most likely associated with the dramatic hormonal changes occurring during pregnancy.

Use of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders for multinational research: translation efforts and reliability assessments in The Netherlands.

AIMS: To outline the steps taken to conduct and to culturally adapt Dutch translations of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) history questionnaire, clinical examination form, and verbal instructions to the patients, and to assess the reliability of the clinical examination. METHODS: For the linguistic translation from English into Dutch, the forward and back-translation approach was followed. For cultural adaptation, an expert panel reviewed the translation, and a pretest was performed on a small clinical sample. Examiner training and calibration were carried out, and the clinical reliability of a "gold standard examiner" and 3 clinicians was assessed on 18 symptomatic TMD patients and 6 asymptomatic controls. The order of the examinations was based on a quasi-random Latin square design. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to assess the overall interexaminer reliability of the clinical examination. RESULTS: A linguistically valid and culturally equivalent translation of the RDC/TMD into Dutch resulted from the above-outlined procedure. As for the clinical reliability, the ICC values obtained could mostly be considered "excellent" or, less frequently, as "fair to good." Poor reliability was found only for some of the palpation tests. For uncommon diagnoses (disc displacement without reduction and without limited mouth opening; osteoarthritis), no reliable ICC value could be calculated. CONCLUSION: The mode described by the authors for preparing clinical sites for RDC/TMD-based research is a feasible one.

Reporting of adverse events and statistical details of efficacy estimates in randomized clinical trials of pain in temporomandibular disorders: Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations, Innovations, Opportunities, and Networks systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Statistical methods and adverse events (that is, harms) data affect the accuracy of conclusions about the risk-to-benefit ratio of treatments for temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). The authors reviewed the quality of reporting in TMD clinical trials to highlight practices that are in need of improvement. TYPES OF STUDIES REVIEWED: The authors included articles published between 1969 and May 31, 2013, in which the investigators reported randomized clinical trials of TMD treatments with pain as a principal outcome variable. Investigators in trials of nonpharmacologic and noninvasive treatments were required to at least mask the participants and assessors; all others were required to be double masked. RESULTS: Ninety articles qualified for this review: 39 published between 1971 and 2005 (older articles) and 51 published between 2006 and 2013 (newer articles). Specification of primary outcome analyses, methods to accommodate missing data, and adverse event collection methods and rates were generally poor. In some cases, there was apparent improvement from the older to the newer cohort; however, reporting of these methodological details remained inadequate even in the newer articles. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: This review is designed to alert authors, reviewers, editors, and readers of TMD clinical trials to these issues and improve reporting quality in the future.

Report of the NIH Task Force on Research Standards for Chronic Low Back Pain.

UNLABELLED: Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed non-specific, and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. The NIH Pain Consortium therefore charged a Research Task Force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimal data set to describe research participants (drawing heavily on the PROMIS methodology); reporting "responder analyses" in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved the recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals. The RTF believes these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of chronic low back pain. We expect the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document, and undergo continual improvement. PERSPECTIVE: A Task Force was convened by the NIH Pain Consortium, with the goal of developing research standards for chronic low back pain. The results included recommendations for definitions, a minimal dataset, reporting outcomes, and future research. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes.

Report of the NIH Task Force on research standards for chronic low back pain.

UNLABELLED: Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed non-specific and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. Therefore, NIH Pain Consortium charged a Research Task Force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimum dataset to describe research participants (drawing heavily on the PROMIS methodology); reporting "responder analyses" in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved the recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals. The RTF believes that these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of chronic low back pain. We expect that the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document and undergo continual improvement. PERSPECTIVE: A task force was convened by the NIH Pain Consortium with the goal of developing research standards for chronic low back pain. The results included recommendations for definitions, a minimum dataset, reporting outcomes, and future research. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes.

Facial expressions of pain and emotions in chronic TMD patients.

This research was designed to identify and validate facial expressions of pain occurring in a clinical chronic pain condition. Facial expressions of 28 patients with chronic temporomandibular disorder pain were videotaped during a painful clinical examination procedure and coded using an anatomically based system. Characteristics of the expressions occurring most frequently were compared with self-report measures of pain, anxiety, depression and somatic symptoms. The frequency, duration and intensity of the identified expressions were dependably correlated with pain report, but unrelated to self report of other somatic symptoms, depression or anxiety. A small number of facial expressions of specific negative emotions were also observed; pain report and pain facial expressions were higher for persons showing a greater number of negative affects. These findings support the promise of facial expressions as measures of clinical pain.