| 1. |
- Wolf, Eva, et al.
(författare)
-
Long-term follow-up by means of a questionnaire of 109 patients with long-lasting orofacial pain.
- 2002
-
Ingår i: Swedish Dental Journal. - : Swedish Dental Association. - 0347-9994. ; 26:3, s. 125-34
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The aims were to follow-up, analyse and compare the pain status after 4-9 years with that at the baseline examination of 109 consecutive patients referred to the Pain Group at the Faculty of Odontology in Malmö, Sweden during the period 1988-1993 due to long-lasting orofacial pain. A further aim was to identify predictive factors of significance for pain alteration. 85 (78%) women with a median age of 51 years and 24 (22%) men with a median age of 60 years were included in the study. A survey of the pain status at the follow-up was conducted by means of a mailed questionnaire. The questionnaire covered the following aspects: pain alteration, pain intensity, pain location, medication and education. After one reminder, the non-responding patients were called for a telephone interview. A response level of 85% was obtained. Significant improvements were noted by the patients in the answers of the questionnaire in mainly three areas; the patients answered individually that pain relief had occurred, pain intensity rated on the VAS was lower at follow-up compared to the baseline examination and a decrease in drug use was reported. The responses indicated pain relief for 75% of the patients. However, only 27% of the patients experienced total disappearance of pain. Medication at baseline with opioids, muscle relaxants with central effect, antidepressants, neuroleptics, hypnotics or sedatives was found to be a predictive factor for persistent pain.
|
|
| 2. |
- Frisk, Fredrik, 1971, et al.
(författare)
-
Pulp exposures in adults--choice of treatment among Swedish dentists.
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Swedish dental journal. - : Sveriges tandläkarförbund. - 0347-9994. ; 37:3, s. 153-60
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This study comprises a survey of Swedish dentists'treatment preferences in cases of carious exposure of the dental pulp in adults.The survey was conducted as part of a comprehensive report on methods of diagnosis and treatment in endodontics, published in 2010 by the Swedish Council on Health Technology Assessment. A questionnaire was mailed to a random subsample of 2012 dental offices where one dentist at each office was requested to answer all questions. Each questionnaire contained one of three sets of questions about endodontic practice routines.Thus around one-third of the subsample received case-specific questions about treating carious exposure. Only general practitioners aged below 70 years were included.The final study sample comprised 412 participants.The dentists were presented with two case scenarios. In Case 1 a 22-year old patient had a deep carious lesion in tooth 36 and in Case 2 a 50-year old patient had a deep carious lesion in tooth 14.The participants were asked to nominate their treatment of choice: pulp capping, partial pulpotomy or pulpectomy. For Case 1, 17 per cent of the respondents selected pulpectomy; the corresponding rate for Case 2 was 47 per cent. Female gender and age group 25-49 years were predictive of selection of less invasive treatment options. However, according to recent guidelines (2011) from the National Board of Health and Wellfare, Swedish dentists are recommended to elect pulpectomy prior to pulp capping/partial pulpotomy when confronted with a tooth having a cariously exposed pulp in adults.
|
|
| 3. |
- Peck, CC, et al.
(författare)
-
Expanding the taxonomy of the diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Journal of Oral Rehabilitation. - : John Wiley & Sons. - 1365-2842 .- 0305-182X. ; 41:1, s. 2-23
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- There is a need to expand the current temporomandibular disorders' (TMDs) classification to include less common but clinically important disorders. The immediate aim was to develop a consensus-based classification system and associated diagnostic criteria that have clinical and research utility for less common TMDs. The long-term aim was to establish a foundation, vis-à-vis this classification system, that will stimulate data collection, validity testing and further criteria refinement. A working group [members of the International RDC/TMD Consortium Network of the International Association for Dental Research (IADR), members of the Orofacial Pain Special Interest Group (SIG) of the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP), and members from other professional societies] reviewed disorders for inclusion based on clinical significance, the availability of plausible diagnostic criteria and the ability to operationalise and study the criteria. The disorders were derived from the literature when possible and based on expert opinion as necessary. The expanded TMDs taxonomy was presented for feedback at international meetings. Of 56 disorders considered, 37 were included in the expanded taxonomy and were placed into the following four categories: temporomandibular joint disorders, masticatory muscle disorders, headache disorders and disorders affecting associated structures. Those excluded were extremely uncommon, lacking operationalised diagnostic criteria, not clearly related to TMDs, or not sufficiently distinct from disorders already included within the taxonomy. The expanded TMDs taxonomy offers an integrated approach to clinical diagnosis and provides a framework for further research to operationalise and test the proposed taxonomy and diagnostic criteria
|
|
| 4. |
- Schiffman, E, et al.
(författare)
-
Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) for Clinical and Research Applications : recommendations of the International RDC/TMD Consortium Network* and Orofacial Pain Special Interest Group
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Journal of oral & facial pain and headache. - : Quintessence. - 2333-0384 .- 2333-0376. ; 28:1, s. 6-27
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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 in further detail jaw functional limitations and psychological distress as well as additional constructs of anxiety and presence of comorbid pain conditions. CONCLUSION: The recommended evidence-based new DC/TMD protocol is appropriate for use in both clinical and research settings. More comprehensive instruments augment short and simple screening instruments for Axis I and Axis II. These validated instruments allow for identification of patients with a range of simple to complex TMD presentations
|
|
