Changing trends in the management of condylar fractures

Our aim was to evaluate the functional outcomes and complications of mandibular condylar fractures managed surgically and non-surgically. Patients were identified retrospectively from audit data and clinical records from 2005-2018, and functional outcomes were evaluated based on the development of complications at clinical follow up. Patients were categorised into three treatment groups: conservative (management with soft diet, analgesia, and monitoring), closed (management with intermaxillary fixation), and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). A total of 358 patients were included with a median age of 33 years (mean 38), and a male:female ratio of 2.7:1. A total of 72 patients (20%) were treated conservatively, 177 (49%) were treated with closed management, and 109 (31%) with ORIF. The ORIF group demonstrated better outcomes than the closed group in terms of reduced protrusive and lateral excursive movements, and temporomandibular joint (TMJ) pain; and in terms of occlusal derangement when compared with the conservative group. The ORIF group had poorer outcomes than both the closed and conservative groups in terms of maximum mouth opening, and temporary facial nerve injury occurred in 5/109 (5%) and condylar resorption in 2/109 (2%) of patients in the ORIF group. There was no incidence of permanent facial nerve injury, Frey syndrome, or paraesthesia of the auricular nerve. The trend that favours ORIF can be justified, as it offers improved functional outcomes in severe or displaced condylar fractures. However, this must be evaluated against the risk of potential surgical complications. Careful case selection is therefore necessary to optimise management of these injuries.

Quality assessment of clinical practice guidelines used in oral and maxillofacial surgery

An assessment of the quality of oral and maxillofacial surgery clinical practice guidelines is lacking. The aim of this investigation was to assess the quality of guidelines using the RIGHT (Reporting Items for practice Guidelines in HealThcare) checklist. The primary outcome was to assess the score (quality) of guidelines based on the RIGHT checklist and to identify predictors (region, type, single or multi-centre, and speciality/non-speciality) influencing the quality score. In this review, following a search of electronic databases and national society websites, a total of 25 guidelines were independently assessed by two assessors against the 22-item RIGHT checklist. Inter-assessor reliability was assessed. Deficiencies in the reporting of items relating to limitations, funding, declaration and management of interests, healthcare questions, and quality assurance were evident. The median overall score for the guidelines was 28 (range 14-66). Guidelines produced by multiple centres (β=57.15, 95% confidence interval -26.62 to 87.68, P= 0.001, multivariate analysis) and non-speciality societies (β=20, 95% confidence interval -0.03 to 40.03, P=0.05, univariate analysis) tended to have higher quality scores. Overall, the quality of clinical practice guidelines used in oral and maxillofacial surgery was deemed suboptimal. If clinical practice guidelines are to be used in making treatment decisions for patients, clinicians should be aware of their possible limitations.