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.

Chronic pain conditions are the top reason patients seek care, the most common reason for disability and addiction, and the biggest driver of healthcare costs; their treatment costs more than cancer, heart disease, dementia, and diabetes care. The personal impact in terms of suffering, disability, depression, suicide, and other problems is incalculable. There has been much effort to prevent many medical and dental conditions, but little effort has been directed toward preventing chronic pain. To address this deficit, a massive open online course (MOOC) was developed for students and healthcare professionals. “Preventing Chronic Pain: A Human Systems Approach” was offered by the University of Minnesota through the online platform Coursera. The first offering of this free open course was in the spring of 2014 and had 23 650 participants; 53% were patients or consumers interested in pain. This article describes the course concepts in preventing chronic pain, the analytic data from course participants, and postcourse evaluation forms.

Albeit psychologists were granted prescription authority in two states over a decade ago and in three states in recent years, the controversy over prescriptive authority persists within the profession and remains a concern of diverse stakeholders. The literature provides minimal research on the adequacy of psychopharmacology training programs and how commensurate psychologists’ training is with other prescribers’ training. Comparing psychopharmacology training for psychologists to other prescribing professionals’ training reveals psychologists receive fewer didactic training hours in foundational sciences (e.g., biology, chemistry, and pathophysiology) and fewer clinical training hours directly related to prescribing and managing medications. Implications of these findings and legal and regulatory cautions are discussed along with recommendations for future research directions.