Aims The original Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) Axis I diagnostic algorithms have been demonstrated to be reliable. However, the Validation Project determined that the RDC/TMD Axis I validity was below the target sensitivity of ≥ 0.70 and specificity of ≥ 0.95. Consequently, these empirical results supported the development of revised RDC/TMD Axis I diagnostic algorithms that were subsequently demonstrated to be valid for the most common pain-related TMD and for one temporomandibular joint (TMJ) intra-articular disorder. The original RDC/TMD Axis II instruments were shown to be both reliable and valid. Working from these findings and revisions, two international consensus workshops were convened, from which recommendations were obtained for the finalization of new Axis I diagnostic algorithms and new Axis II instruments. Methods Through a series of workshops and symposia, a panel of clinical and basic science pain experts modified the revised RDC/TMD Axis I algorithms by using comprehensive searches of published TMD diagnostic literature followed by review and consensus via a formal structured process. The panel's recommendations for further revision of the Axis I diagnostic algorithms were assessed for validity by using the Validation Project's data set, and for reliability by using newly collected data from the ongoing TMJ Impact Project—the follow-up study to the Validation Project. New Axis II instruments were identified through a comprehensive search of the literature providing valid instruments that, relative to the RDC/TMD, are shorter in length, are available in the public domain, and currently are being used in medical settings. Results The newly recommended Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD) Axis I protocol includes both a valid screener for detecting any pain-related TMD as well as valid diagnostic criteria for differentiating the most common pain-related TMD (sensitivity ≥ 0.86, specificity ≥ 0.98) and for one intra-articular disorder (sensitivity of 0.80 and specificity of 0.97). Diagnostic criteria for other common intra-articular disorders lack adequate validity for clinical diagnoses but can be used for screening purposes. Inter-examiner reliability for the clinical assessment associated with the validated DC/TMD criteria for pain-related TMD is excellent (kappa ≥ 0.85). Finally, a comprehensive classification system that includes both the common and less common TMD is also presented. The Axis II protocol retains selected original RDC/TMD screening instruments augmented with new instruments to assess jaw function as well as behavioral and additional psychosocial factors. The Axis II protocol is divided into screening and comprehensive self-report instrument sets. The screening instruments’ 41 questions assess pain intensity, pain-related disability, psychological distress, jaw functional limitations, and parafunctional behaviors, and a pain drawing is used to assess locations of pain. The comprehensive instruments, composed of 81 questions, assess i...

Although most cases of temporomandibular muscle and joint disorders (TMJD) are mild and self-limiting, about 10% of TMJD patients develop severe disorders associated with chronic pain and disability. It has been suggested that depression and catastrophizing contributes to TMJD chronicity. This article assesses the effects of catastrophizing and depression on clinically significant TMJD pain (Graded Chronic Pain Scale [GCPS] II-IV). Four hundred eighty participants, recruited from the Minneapolis/St. Paul area through media advertisements and local dentists, received examinations and completed the GCPS at baseline and at 18-month follow-up. In a multivariable analysis including gender, age, and worst pain intensity, baseline catastrophizing (β 3.79, P<0.0001) and pain intensity at baseline (β 0.39, P<0.0001) were positively associated with characteristic of pain intensity at the 18th month. Disability at the 18-month follow-up was positively related to catastrophizing (β 0.38, P<0.0001) and depression (β 0.17, P=0.02). In addition, in the multivariable analysis adjusted by the same covariates previously described, the onset of clinically significant pain (GCPS II-IV) at the 18-month follow-up was associated with catastrophizing (odds ratio [OR] 1.72, P=0.02). Progression of clinically significant pain was related to catastrophizing (OR 2.16, P<0.0001) and widespread pain at baseline (OR 1.78, P=0.048). Results indicate that catastrophizing and depression contribute to the progression of chronic TMJD pain and disability, and therefore should be considered as important factors when evaluating and developing treatment plans for patients with TMJD.

Summary  The research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (RDC/TMD) have been employed internationally since 1992 for the study of temporomandibular muscle and joint disorders (TMD). This diagnostic protocol incorporates a dual system for assessment of TMD for Axis I physical diagnoses as well as Axis II psychological status and pain‐related disability. Because the reliability and criterion validity of RDC/TMD had not yet been comprehensively characterised, the National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research funded in 2001 the most definitive research to date on the RDC/TMD as a U01 project entitled, ‘Research Diagnostic Criteria: Reliability and Validity’. The results of this multi‐site collaboration involving the University of Minnesota, the University of Washington, and the University at Buffalo were first reported at a pre‐session workshop of the Toronto general session of the International Association of Dental Research on 2 July 2008. Summaries of five reports from this meeting are presented in this paper including: (i) reliability of RDC/TMD Axis I diagnoses based on clinical signs and symptoms; (ii) reliability of radiographic interpretations used for RDC/TMD Axis I diagnoses; (iii) reliability of self‐report data used for RDC/TMD Axis I diagnoses; (iv) validity of RDC/TMD Axis I diagnoses based on clinical signs and symptoms; and (v) proposed revisions of the RDC/TMD Axis I diagnostic algorithms.

For individuals with temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disc displacement without reduction with limited mouth opening (closed lock), interventions vary from minimal treatment to surgery. In a single-blind trial, 106 individuals with TMJ closed lock were randomized among medical management, rehabilitation, arthroscopic surgery with post-operative rehabilitation, or arthroplasty with post-operative rehabilitation. Evaluations at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, and 60 months used the Craniomandibular Index (CMI) and Symptom Severity Index (SSI) for jaw function and TMJ pain respectively. Using an intention-to-treat analysis, we observed no between-group difference at any follow-up for CMI (p > or = 0.33) or SSI (p > or = 0.08). Both outcomes showed within-group improvement (p < 0.0001) for all groups. The findings of this study suggest that primary treatment for individuals with TMJ closed lock should consist of medical management or rehabilitation. The use of this approach will avoid unnecessary surgical procedures.