SD-OCT might be a suitable non-invasive method for longitudinal assessments of surface sealant durability in clinical trials.

Background and Objective: Objective of this study was to determine whether the diagnostic accuracy of the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/ TMD) is sufficient for use among schoolchildren aged 8-12 years. Methods: This prospective cohort study on diagnostic accuracy with calibrated examiners was conducted among 533 children of both sexes aged 8-12 years, with and without TMD symptoms, selected randomly from the Rhein-Neckar district. Self-reporting of non-dental facial pain was used as the reference standard, against which we calculated the following for the pain-related items of the DC/TMD (index test): sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios, diagnostic odds ratio, accuracy and 95% Wilson Score confidence intervals. We also calculated the area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curve displaying sensitivity and specificity. Results: Our final sample consisted of 282 children, half of whom reported having facial pain and 3.2% reported sounds from the temporomandibular joints (TMJs). Despite high specificity (90.78%; 95% confidence interval (CI): [84.86%; 94.53%]), sensitivity of the adapted DC/TMD for pain on maximum jaw opening was poor (37.59%; 95% CI: [30.02%; 45.81%]). For pain on palpation, more similar values were recorded for sensitivity (74.47%; 95% CI: [66.69%; 80.95%]) and specificity (70.21%; 95% CI: [62.21%; 77.14%]). The diagnostic odds ratio was >1 for both examinations. The AUROC for pain on opening was 68.39% (95% CI: [62.62%; 74.16%]), and for pain on palpation, it was 74.63% (95% CI: [69.45%; 79.81%]), whereas the combination of both resulted to an AUROC of 74.09% (95% CI: [68.96%; 79.21%]). It was not possible to measure the diagnostic accuracy of the DC/TMD regarding TMJ sounds or jawopening limitations, as they occurred too rarely in our sample. Conclusion: In this study, the diagnostic accuracy of the DC/TMD for TMD-related pain in children was lower than that recorded for adults in previous studies.

Summary Background The integrity of orthodontic surface sealants after professional tooth cleaning (PTC) has previously only been evaluated in vitro. Recently, we have shown that optical coherence tomography (OCT) can successfully be used for the longitudinal assessments of sealant thickness in vitro and in vivo. Objectives Thus, the aim of the present study was to assess the sealant thickness after PTC in vitro and in vivo by OCT. Trial design Single-centre four-arm parallel-group randomized controlled trial. Methods Ninety-six extracted human teeth were randomly assigned to the surface sealants Pro Seal® (PS) and Opal® Seal™ (OS) and to PTC protocols: (1) polishing with brush and prophy paste (Cleanic®) or (2) erythritol air-polishing. Sealant thickness was assessed by OCT immediately after application (baseline), after thermocycling and after polishing for totals of 5, 10, 15, 30, 60, 90, and 120 seconds. Additionally, a clinical trial was conducted. Therefore, using a split-mouth design, quadrants of 20 patients and PTC protocols were randomized by an external randomization centre using computer generated tables to assign the surface sealants and PTC protocols. Sealant thicknesses were analysed at baseline, before and after PTC. Due to the optical properties of sealants, a complete blinding was not feasible. Results In vitro both sealants revealed significant layer thickness losses after both PTC protocols. PS lost 0.77 µm/s [95% CI (confidence interval): 0.67, 0.87] from air-polishing and 0.43 µm/s (95% CI: 0.37, 0.49) from polishing with brush while OS lost 0.44 µm/s (95% CI: 0.32, 0.55) from air-polishing and 0.79 µm/s (95% CI: 0.68, 0.89) from polishing with brush of layer thickness. Sealant thickness loss of was significantly higher after erythritol air-polishing for PS and after polishing with brush for OS. The results of a concurrent randomized controlled trial (RCT) were comparable to those achieved in the in vitro part of this study. Limitations Long-term surface sealant abrasion should be validated by additional RCTs. Conclusions For PTC on surface sealant treated teeth, low abrasive protocols should be used. Air-polishing should be avoided on PS protected teeth and polishing with brush on OS treated teeth. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03753256.

Background and Objective The aim of this single‐centre, two‐arm, parallel‐group, double‐blinded, randomised controlled trial was to investigate the disputed specific effectiveness of acupuncture by comparing acupuncture on specific and non‐specific points among patients with non‐chronic, painful TMDs. Methods Following predefined eligibility criteria, 49 consecutive patients of both sexes were recruited to the study. All subjects were diagnosed with a non‐chronic (Graded Chronic Pain Scale grade <3) painful TMD, as assessed using the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD). Patients were randomly assigned to group A (acupuncture on specific points) or group B (acupuncture on non‐specific points) after the initial examination (T0). Both acupuncture treatment sessions were conducted by a trained dentist once a week for four weeks. The examination was repeated five weeks (T5) after T0 by one calibrated examiner who was unaware of the study groups. Characteristic pain intensity (CPI) was evaluated as the main outcome criterion and compared between times and treatment groups by means of non‐parametric tests (significance level set at P = .05). Secondary outcomes comprised the maximum corrected active mouth‐opening without pain (MAO); patients’ expectations regarding acupuncture treatment and pain development; depressivity; and oral health‐related quality of life (OHRQoL). Results A total of 41 patients (38 female) successfully completed the study (mean age: 40.17 ± 16.61). The two groups did not differ significantly at any time in terms of age and CPI. However, CPI was significantly (P < .05) lower at T5 than at T0 for both groups (29.66 and 30.35% lower in group A and group B, respectively). An increase in MAO was observed at T5 for both groups but was significant for group B only (P = .016). All patients had positive expectations of acupuncture therapy, and the two groups did not differ significantly at T5 with regard to the extent to which their expectations had been fulfilled by the treatment (P = .717). Comparison of T0 and T5 showed a statistically significant reduction of depressivity for group A (P = .0205), but no significant change for group B (P = .329). At T5, OHRQoL had improved significantly for both groups (group A, P = .018; group B, P < .001) compared with at T0. Conclusions Acupuncture on both specific and non‐specific points reduces the non‐dysfunctional pain of TMD patients. The effect of acupuncture on painful TMD cannot be attributed to the specific point selection.

No abstract