Analysis of Chronic Temporomandibular Disorders Based on the Latest Diagnostic Criteria

Abstract

The objective of this study is to analyze the distribution of the most common diagnoses observed in patients with chronic temporomandibular disorders, based on the new diagnostic criteria (DC/TMD) adopted in 2014. The previous Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC/TMD) adopted in 1992, consisted of three main groups of eight diagnostic subgroups and is currently transformed into two main groups and twelve subgroups, respectively. All subgroups correspond to the nomenclature of the ICD-10. The new clinical diagnostic indices are also modifi ed. The analysis showed a prevalence of Pain-Related TMD compared with that of intra-articular disorders in ratio 57.89% to 42.10%. In Pain-Related TMD arthralgia was represented in 55% of cases; local myalgia -in 12%, myofascial pain -in 18%, myofascial pain with referral -in 14%, headache attributed to TMD -in 1%. In Intra-articular TMD disc displacement with reduction was found in 23% of the cases, disc displacement with reduction with intermittent locking -in 3%, disc displacement without reduction with limited opening -in 25%, disc displacement without reduction and without limited opening -in 8%. Degenerative diseases were found in 14.28%, and hypermobility and subluxations -in 26.98%. These analyzes differ and can only partly be compared with previous analyzes based on RDC system. The changes in the diagnostic criteria require new clinical studies in order to refi ne the picture of temporomandibular pathology in accordance with the modern views on the matter.

Oral characteristics and medical considerations in the dental treatment of individuals with Williams syndrome

“…The average protrusion (PR) was 4.4 mm (ranging from 1.4 to 7 mm) for adults and 5.3 mm (ranging from 4 to 7 mm) for children (Table ). The results of MMO, LA, and PR were lower than the reference values …”

“…Mandibular movements such as maximum mouth opening (MMO), laterality (LA), and protrusion (PR) as well as open bite and overbite, were measured with a millimeter ruler. The following values were used as reference: MMO = 41.97 ± 5.27 mm, LA = 6.13 ± 2.21 mm, and PR = 3.96 ± 1.92 mm for children and, MMO = 53.3 to 58.6 mm, LA = 8.7 to 11.1 mm, and PR = 8.8 to 9.5 mm for adults older than 18 years old …”

Headache attributed to TMD Is Associated With the Presence of Comorbid Bodily Pain: A Case‐Control Study

“…Finally, the DC/TMD criteria require the headache to be recognized by the patient as a familiar headache following palpation of temporalis muscle or function tests of the masticatory muscles, while the ICHD‐3 criteria do not . In our study, we based the TMDH diagnosis on the ICHD‐3 criteria, which may have resulted in a higher prevalence of TMDH in our cohort (29.3%) than in studies that used the DC/TMD criteria (TMDH prevalence was 1 and 5.7%, as reported by Svechtarov et al and van der Meer, respectively …”

“…The diagnostic criteria included evidence of causation as demonstrated by at least 2 of the following criteria: (1) The headache has developed in temporal relationship to the onset of TMD, or led to its discovery; (2) The headache is aggravated by jaw motion, jaw function (eg, chewing), and/or jaw parafunction (eg, bruxism); and (3) The headache is provoked on physical examination by temporalis muscle palpation and/or passive movement of the jaw . TMDH has been listed as 1 of 12 most common types of TMD, with prevalence ranging between 1 and 5.7% . Recent studies suggest that TMDH is amenable to the management of TMD .…”

GaAlAs phototherapy for tension and compression related temporomandibular disorders

“…Former research have reviewed the subject on single laser therapy for definite muscle groups or TMJ. Up till now the combined cold laser therapy has been researched in the context of seven of the DC/TMD diagnosis with high specificity and sensibility (17,18,24). However, from a clinical point of view the evaluation of any kind of treatment of bigger diagnostic subgroups that are based on etiopathogenetic factors involved is very expedient and in a total agreement with DC/ TMD methodology.…”