Summary Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) are common chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions among orofacial pain. Painful TMD condition such as myalgia and arthralgia can be managed by exercise therapy. However, as it is hard to access actual effect of each modality that is included in an exercise therapy programme due to multiple choice of the management modality, their efficacy remains controversial. Therefore, this review focused on the effects of exercise therapy for the management of painful TMD. The aims of this review were to summarise the effects of exercise therapy for major symptoms of painful TMD and to establish a guideline for the management of painful TMD, resulting in higher quality and reliability of dental treatment. In this review, exercise modalities are clearly defined as follows: mobilisation exercise, muscle strengthening exercise (resistance training), coordination exercise and postural exercise. Furthermore, pain intensity and range of movements were focused as outcome parameters in this review. Mobilisation exercise including manual therapy, passive jaw mobilisation with oral appliances and voluntary jaw exercise appeared to be a promising option for painful TMD conditions such as myalgia and arthralgia. This review addressed not only the effects of exercise therapy on various clinical conditions of painful TMD shown in the past, but also an urgent need for consensus among dentists and clinicians in terms of the management of each condition, as well as terminology.

Referred sensations (RS) are commonly found in various musculoskeletal pain conditions. Experimental studies have shown that RS can be elicited through glutamate injection and mechanical stimulation. Despite this, differences and similarities between these modalities in RS outcomes remain unclear. The aim of this study was to assess differences between mechanical-induced and glutamate injection-induced RS in the trigeminal region. The present randomized, double-blind, controlled, cross-over study recruited 60 healthy participants who were assessed in 2 different sessions. In both sessions, pressure was applied to the masseter muscle with 4 different forces (0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kg), and glutamate (1 mol/L or 0.25 mol/L) was injected into the same area. Participants rated their perceived masseter sensations and rated and drew any RS they experienced. No difference was found in number of participants reporting RS after glutamate injection compared with mechanical stimulation. More participants reported RS when the stimulus was painful compared with a nonpainful stimulus. Furthermore, it was shown that the more intense the stimulus, the higher the frequency of RS. Finally, RS centre-of-gravity location was similar between the 2 sessions. In summary, RS was elicited in healthy individuals through both modalities, and no differences in frequency of RS were observed in the orofacial region. Hence, RS does not seem to be modality-dependent, and only the painfulness of the stimulus caused an increase in frequency of RS. Finally, RS location for each participant was similar in both sessions possibly indicating a preferred location of referral. These findings may have implications for our understanding of RS in craniofacial pain conditions.

The aim of this study was to investigate temporal and spatial aspects of somatosensory changes after topical application of capsaicin, menthol and local anesthetics (LA) on the gingiva with the use of intraoral palpometers and thermal devices. Sixteen healthy volunteers (eight male, eight female) participated. Four topical preparations (capsaicin, menthol, LA and Vaseline as a control) were randomly applied to the gingiva around the first premolar in the upper jaw via individual oral templates, which allowed spatial mapping of somatosensory changes at and adjacent to the site of application. The topical drugs were applied for 15 min in a randomized and balanced sequence. The perceived preparation-evoked pain intensity was recorded with the use of 0-10 visual analog scales (VAS). Standardized mechanical and thermal stimuli were applied before, during and up to 30 min after the topical applications, and numerical rating scales (NRS) were used to score the perceived intensity of the stimuli. Peak VAS, area under the curve and mean VAS preparation-evoked pain scores for capsaicin, menthol, LA and control were compared with paired t tests. NRS scores for mechanical and thermal test stimuli were analyzed with four-way repeated measurements analyses of variance. Capsaicin evoked significantly higher VAS pain parameters as well as higher NRS scores to heat stimuli than control (P < 0.029). There were no significant differences in stimulus-evoked NRS scores between the menthol and control conditions (P = 0.518), but LA caused significantly lower stimulus-evoked NRS scores compared with control (P < 0.001). Post hoc tests showed that capsaicin caused sensitization to heat stimuli at and adjacent to the application area. In conclusion, this study for the first time demonstrates the time course of capsaicin-evoked heat hyperalgesia in and outside the site of application at the oral mucosa (primary and secondary hyperalgesia).

The reliability of intraoral thermal sensitivity recorded with the 5-mm-diameter device varied greatly between different sites. Nonetheless, with this caveat in mind, the study did document that semiquantitative assessment of intraoral thermal sensitivity is feasible and applicable for clinical studies in different intraoral pain conditions.