Evidence‐based dentistry or meta‐analysis illness? A commentary on current publishing trends in the field of temporomandibular disorders and bruxism

The development of the Standardised Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB): An international road map

This paper summarises the background reasoning and work that led to the selection of the items included in the Standardised Tool for the Assessment of Bruxism (STAB), also introducing the list of items. The instrument is currently being tested for face validity and on-field comprehension. The underlying premise is that the different motor activities included in the bruxism spectrum (e.g. clenching vs. grinding, with or without teeth contact) potentially need to be discriminated from each other, based on their purportedly different aetiology, comorbidities and potential consequences. Focus should be on a valid impression of the activities' frequency, intensity and duration. The methods that can be used for the above purposes can be grouped into strategies that collect information from the patient's history (subject-based), from the clinical assessment performed by an examiner (clinically based) or from the use of instruments to measure certain outcomes (instrumentally based). The three strategies can apply to all aspects of bruxism (i.e. status, comorbid conditions, aetiology and consequences). The STAB will help gathering information on many aspects, factors and conditions that are currently poorly investigated in the field of bruxism. To this purpose, it is divided into two axes. Axis A includes the self-reported information on bruxism status and potential consequences (subject-based report) together with the clinical (examiner report) and instrumental assessment (technology report). Axis B includes the self-reported information (subject-based report) on factors and conditions that may have an etiological or comorbid role for bruxism. This comprehensive multidimensional assessment system will allow building predictive model for clinical and research purposes.

The Role of Emotion Regulation, Affect, and Sleep in Individuals With Sleep Bruxism and Those Without: Protocol for a Remote Longitudinal Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Sleep bruxism (SB) is an oral behavior characterized by high levels of repetitive jaw muscle activity during sleep, leading to teeth grinding and clenching, and may develop into a disorder. Despite its prevalence and negative outcomes on oral health and quality of life, there is currently no cure for SB. The etiology of SB remains poorly understood, but recent research suggests a potential role of negative emotions and maladaptive emotion regulation (ER).

OBJECTIVE

This study's primary aim investigates whether ER is impaired in individuals with SB, while controlling for affective and sleep disturbances. The secondary aim tests for the presence of cross-sectional and longitudinal mediation pathways in the bidirectional relationships among SB, ER, affect, and sleep.

METHODS

The study used a nonrandomized repeated-measures observational design and was conducted remotely. Participants aged 18-49 years underwent a 14-day ambulatory assessment. Data collection was carried out using electronic platforms. We assessed trait and state SB and ER alongside affect and sleep variables. We measured SB using self-reported trait questionnaires, ecological momentary assessment (EMA) for real-time reports of SB behavior, and portable electromyography for multinight assessment of rhythmic masticatory muscle activity. We assessed ER through self-reported trait questionnaires, EMA for real-time reports of ER strategies, and heart rate variability derived from an electrocardiography wireless physiological sensor as an objective physiological measure. Participants' trait affect and real-time emotional experiences were obtained using self-reported trait questionnaires and EMA. Sleep patterns and quality were evaluated using self-reported trait questionnaires and sleep diaries, as well as actigraphy as a physiological measure. For the primary objective, analyses will test for maladaptive ER in terms of strategy use frequency and effectiveness as a function of SB using targeted contrasts in the general linear model. Control analyses will be conducted to examine the persistence of the SB-ER relationship after adjusting for affective and sleep measures, as well as demographic variables. For the secondary objective, cross-sectional and longitudinal mediation analyses will test various competing models of directional effects among self-reported and physiological measures of SB, ER, affect, and sleep.

RESULTS

This research received funding in April 2017. Data collection took place from August 2020 to March 2022. In all, 237 participants were eligible and completed the study. Data analysis has not yet started.

CONCLUSIONS

We hope that the effort to thoroughly measure SB and ER using gold standard methods and cutting-edge technology will advance the knowledge of SB. The findings of this study may contribute to a better understanding of the relationship among SB, ER, affect, and sleep disturbances. By identifying the role of ER in SB, the results may pave the way for the development of targeted interventions for SB management to alleviate the pain and distress of those affected.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/41719.

The effectiveness of manual therapy applied to craniomandibular structures in the treatment of temporomandibular disorders: protocol for a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The term temporomandibular disorder (TMD) includes disorders of the temporomandibular joints (TMJ), masticatory muscles and adjacent tissues. Several studies have examined the effectiveness of manual therapy (MT) for TMDs by evaluating changes in pain and maximum mouth opening (MMO). Nevertheless, the effectiveness of MT exclusively applied to the craniomandibular structures (craniomandibular manual therapy (CMMT)) on pain and TMJ range of motion remains unclear. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of CMMT on pain and TMJ range of motion in people with TMDs.

METHODS

This protocol is reported in line with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P). Databases including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, ZETOC, Web of Science, SCOPUS, PEDro, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Best Evidence, EBM reviews-Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Index to Chiropractic Literature ChiroAccess and Google Scholar will be searched from inception as well as key journals and grey literature. Randomised controlled trials involving adults with TMD that compare the effect of any type of CMMT (e.g. mobilisation) on pain and range of motion with a placebo intervention, controlled care intervention or other types of treatment will be included. Two reviewers will independently screen articles for inclusion, extract data, assess risk of bias (revised Cochrane risk of bias tool) for included studies and evaluate overall quality of evidence (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). A meta-analysis will be conducted if possible. If not, a narrative synthesis will be conducted reporting the effectiveness of CMMT according to disorder type (TMJ disorders, masticatory muscle disorders and mixed disorders).

DISCUSSION

In this review, the effectiveness of MT applied to craniomandibular structures for the treatment of TMD will be evaluated. Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences. We expect our findings will facilitate treatment planning for manual therapists managing patients with TMD and provide future clinical research implications.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019160213.

Oral splints for patients with temporomandibular disorders or bruxism: a systematic review and economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Splints are a non-invasive, reversible management option for temporomandibular disorders or bruxism. The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of splints remain uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of splints for patients with temporomandibular disorders or bruxism. This evidence synthesis compared (1) all types of splint versus no/minimal treatment/control splints and (2) prefabricated versus custom-made splints, for the primary outcomes, which were pain (temporomandibular disorders) and tooth wear (bruxism).

REVIEW METHODS

Four databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, were searched from inception until 1 October 2018 for randomised clinical trials. The searches were conducted on 1 October 2018. Cochrane review methods (including risk of bias) were used for the systematic review. Standardised mean differences were pooled for the primary outcome of pain, using random-effects models in temporomandibular disorder patients. A Markov cohort, state-transition model, populated using current pain and Characteristic Pain Intensity data, was used to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for splints compared with no splint, from an NHS perspective over a lifetime horizon. A value-of-information analysis identified future research priorities.

RESULTS

Fifty-two trials were included in the systematic review. The evidence identified was of very low quality with unclear reporting by temporomandibular disorder subtype. When all subtypes were pooled into one global temporomandibular disorder group, there was no evidence that splints reduced pain [standardised mean difference (at up to 3 months) -0.18, 95% confidence interval -0.42 to 0.06; substantial heterogeneity] when compared with no splints or a minimal intervention. There was no evidence that other outcomes, including temporomandibular joint noises, decreased mouth-opening, and quality of life, improved when using splints. Adverse events were generally not reported, but seemed infrequent when reported. The most plausible base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was uncertain and driven by the lack of clinical effectiveness evidence. The cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed splints becoming more cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of ≈£6000, but the probability never exceeded 60% at higher levels of willingness to pay. Results were sensitive to longer-term extrapolation assumptions. A value-of-information analysis indicated that further research is required. There were no studies measuring tooth wear in patients with bruxism. One small study looked at pain and found a reduction in the splint group [mean difference (0-10 scale) -2.01, 95% CI -1.40 to -2.62; very low-quality evidence]. As there was no evidence of a difference between splints and no splints, the second objective became irrelevant.

LIMITATIONS

There was a large variation in the diagnostic criteria, splint types and outcome measures used and reported. Sensitivity analyses based on these limitations did not indicate a reduction in pain.

CONCLUSIONS

The very low-quality evidence identified did not demonstrate that splints reduced pain in temporomandibular disorders as a group of conditions. There is insufficient evidence to determine whether or not splints reduce tooth wear in patients with bruxism. There remains substantial uncertainty surrounding the most plausible incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

FUTURE WORK

There is a need for well-conducted trials to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of splints in patients with carefully diagnosed and subtyped temporomandibular disorders, and patients with bruxism, using agreed measures of pain and tooth wear.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017068512.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Tinnitus in Temporomandibular Disorders patients: any clinical implications from research findings?

Data sources PubMed, the Cochrane Library and the Web of Science databases supplemented by a search of selected textbooks and the reference lists of included papers.Study selection Two reviewers independently selected studies. Studies involving more than ten TMD patients published in English or Swedish were considered.Data extraction and synthesis Two reviewers independently abstracted data and assessed risk of bias using the Joanna Briggs Institute prevalence critical appraisal pool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.Results Twenty-five studies were included. Seventeen described the prevalence or incidence in a TMD population, five reported prevalence and treatment outcomes and three treatment outcomes only. Prevalence of tinnitus ranged from 3.7% to 70% (median 42.3%) in TMD patients compared with 1.7% to 26% (median 12%) in control groups. Only one study provided evidence that treatment could improve symptoms compared with no treatment.Conclusions This systematic review found a higher prevalence of tinnitus in patients with TMD compared with the general population. This supports the comorbidity between TMD and tinnitus; however, all but one of the included primary studies on treatment of TMD lacked control groups, which means that future research should target the pathophysiological association.