Therapy outcome measures in temporomandibular disorder: a scoping review. Issue 8 (19th August 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ooi, Kazuhiro; Aihara, Morio; Matsumura, Hidehisa; Matsuda, Shinpei; Watanabe, Yuki; Yuasa, Hidemichi; Matsuka, Yoshizo
• Is Part Of: BMJ open. Volume 12:Issue 8(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-08-19
• Subjects: oral & maxillofacial surgery -- epidemiology -- oral medicine; Medicine -- Research -- Periodicals; 610.72
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061387
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2044-6055

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: Therapy outcome measures (TOMs) in temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) have not been systematically evaluated. We systematically explored the main TOM assessment methods for TMD TOMs used in previous studies. Design: Scoping review. Data sources: According to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Review reporting guidelines, we systematically searched five key databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Epistemonikos and ClinicalTrials) and thoroughly scanned relevant grey literature using Medical Subject Headings, Emtree and index terms. Eligibility criteria: We considered primary research papers published from January 2010 to December 2020 that included patients with TMD aged ≥18 years, diagnosed according to the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders. Data extraction and synthesis: Four reviewers extracted general information and information on study design and setting, target, interventions, and outcome type. Results: One hundred and seventy-two of the 3726 screened articles (3704 by search engines and 22 manually) were included. The TOMs analysed included pain (n=161 articles), maximal mouth opening (MMO) (91), jaw function (32), jaw movement (26), joint sound (16), quality of life (QOL) (15), depression/anxiety (14), oral QOL (10) or others (30). Evaluation periods were <4 weeks (111), <8 weeks (62), <12 weeks (59), >12 weeks (75) or 'not mentioned' (12). Pain outcomes (229) included general pain (115), tenderness (45), pain during functioning (44), resting pain (16) and others (8). Pain outcome evaluation methods included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; 121), Numerical Rating Scale (21) and other methods (21). Pain outcome indicators were binary (10) or continuous (158); only five studies reported the least significant difference in treatment efficacy. MMO evaluation using painless methods (19) and jaw function evaluation using methods assessing mandibular movement range (23) were the most frequent. Conclusions: TMD TOMs are diverse; the major outcomes were pain, MMO, jaw function and jaw movement. Most pain outcomes are evaluated by VAS Score changes.