The Neck Disability Index is Not Correlated with Some Parameters of Temporomandibular Disorders: A Cross-Sectional Study

Thorp, Jacob N.; Willson, John D.

doi:10.11607/ofph.1992

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The length of TMD symptoms was not correlated with VPRS or participant perceived improvement. The negligible impact that the duration of symptoms had on pain and function has also been reported in a previous study (Thorp & Willson, ). The authors of that study also found no difference in treatment outcome using Neck Disability Index scores between participants with neck pain for 16 months compared with participants with pain for an average of 120 months.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Thoracic spine manipulation did not improve maximal mouth opening in participants with temporomandibular dysfunction

Thorp

Willson

2019

Physiotherapy Res Intl

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Purpose Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMD) have a prevalence of more than 5% in the general population. A positive correlation exists between temporomandibular joint mobility and cervical spine mobility. Similarly, a relationship exists between thoracic and cervical spine mobility. However, it is unknown if interventions to improve the mobility of the thoracic spine positively impact temporomandibular joint motion and pain. This study tested the hypothesis that a single thoracic thrust joint manipulation (TJM) would improve maximum mouth opening (MMO) compared with participants without TMD as well as decrease TMD symptoms. Methods Forty‐eight people with TMD (30.9 years old ±11.3) and 55 people without TMD (28.5 years old ±9.2) participated. Both groups received a seated upper thoracic TJM and were measured for MMO before and immediately following the TJM. The duration of TMD symptoms and pre‐thrust current pain, using the 11‐point Verbal Pain Rating Scale (VPRS), was recorded in the TMD group. Participants in the TMD group were contacted 2–3 days after TJM to report current VPRS and improvement utilizing the Global Rating of Change (GROC) scale. Results No difference in MMO treatment response over time was observed between groups (p = .56). The MMO in the TMD group improved from 40 to 41.3 mm, and the non‐TMD similarly improved from 44.5 to 45.4 mm. The VPRS decreased from 2.4 (±1.8) to 1.3 (±1.5) following thoracic TJM (p < .001), and the average GROC score was 1.8 (±2.25), which was statistically different than zero (no change; p < .001). The duration of TMD symptoms prior to TJM was not associated with GROC scores (r = .018, p = .90) or VPRS change scores (r = −.07, p = .64). Conclusion The observed treatment effects did not exceed previously reported standards for clinical relevance (5 mm and 2 points, respectively).

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Thoracic spine manipulation did not improve maximal mouth opening in participants with temporomandibular dysfunction

Thorp

Willson

2019

Physiotherapy Res Intl

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Neither of the case-control studies presented non-response rates for the participants. Seventeen cross-sectional studies showed fair methodological quality, with a score of 2 [37][38][39][40]43,48,[50][51][52][53][54][55]57,62,63,66,67]; the other 12 studies achieved a score of 1 or lower, which is considered poor methodological quality [36,42,[44][45][46]49,56,[58][59][60]64,65]. The mean total score for methodological quality was 1.48, with a standard deviation of 0.68, and a range of 0-2.…”

Section: Results Of the Methodological Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, four studies carried out a physical exploration in order to give a TMD diagnosis. Finally, in four studies, the samples had already been diagnosed with TMD [45,57,60,64], and in three studies, the TMD diagnosis criteria were not specified [41,58,66].…”

Section: Temporomandibular (Tmd) Diagnosis Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A total of 1903 patients with TMD were included in the experimental group [37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][58][59][60][61][62][63][64][65]67], and their symptoms lasted at least 3 months. The TMD presented in isolation or concomitantly with other clinical entities, such as neck pain, neck disability, headache, cervicogenic headache, cervical spine disorders, and disc-interference disorders [43,44,46,50,53,54,60,[62][63][64]. In terms of the TMD diagnosis, 21 studies contained data on myogenous TMD [36][37][38][39][40][41]43,47,…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Study Populationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The TMD presented in isolation or concomitantly with other clinical entities, such as neck pain, neck disability, headache, cervicogenic headache, cervical spine disorders, and disc-interference disorders [43,44,46,50,53,54,60,[62][63][64]. In terms of the TMD diagnosis, 21 studies contained data on myogenous TMD [36][37][38][39][40][41]43,47,48,50,51,53,55,56,58,60,[62][63][64][65]67], 19 studies included data on mixed TMD [36][37][38][39][40][41]43,[50][51][52][53]55,56,58,[62][63][64]…”

Section: Characteristics Of the Study Populationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Craniocervical and Cervical Spine Features of Patients with Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Cuenca‐Martínez

Herranz‐Gómez

Madroñero-Miguel

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To assess neck disability with respect to jaw disability, craniocervical position, cervical alignment, and sensorimotor impairments in patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD), a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies trials were conducted. The meta-analysis showed statistically significant differences in the association between neck disability and jaw disability (standardized mean difference (SMD), 0.72 (0.56–0.82)). However, results showed no significant differences for cervical alignment (SMD, 0.02 (−0.31–0.36)) or for the craniocervical position (SMD, −0.09 (−0.27–0.09)). There was moderate evidence for lower pressure pain thresholds (PPT) and for limited cervical range of motion (ROM). There was limited evidence for equal values for maximal strength between the patients with TMD and controls. There was also limited evidence for reduced cervical endurance and conflicting evidence for abnormal electromyographic (EMG) activity and motor control in TMD patients. Results showed a clinically relevant association between cervical and mandibular disability in patients with TMD. Regarding sensory-motor alterations, the most conclusive findings were observed in the reduction of PPT and cervical ROM, with moderate evidence of their presence in the patients with TMD. Lastly, the evidence on impaired motor control and cervical EMG activity in patients with TMD was conflicting.

show abstract

Occurrence and severity of neck disability in individuals with different types of temporomandibular disorder

Figueirêdo

Araújo

Fonseca

et al. 2021

Oral Maxillofac Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Neck Disability Index is Not Correlated with Some Parameters of Temporomandibular Disorders: A Cross-Sectional Study

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

Thoracic spine manipulation did not improve maximal mouth opening in participants with temporomandibular dysfunction

Thoracic spine manipulation did not improve maximal mouth opening in participants with temporomandibular dysfunction

Craniocervical and Cervical Spine Features of Patients with Temporomandibular Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Occurrence and severity of neck disability in individuals with different types of temporomandibular disorder

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About