Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Intraoral myofascial therapy for chronic myogenous temporomandibular disorder: a randomized controlled trial [with consumer summary]
Kalamir A, Bonello R, Graham P, Vitiello AL, Pollard H
Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics 2012 Jan;35(1):26-37
clinical trial
8/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: Yes; Adequate follow-up: Yes; Intention-to-treat analysis: Yes; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

OBJECTIVE: Studies investigating the efficacy of intraoral myofascial therapies (IMTs) for chronic temporomandibular disorder (TMD) are rare. The present study was an expansion of a previously published pilot study that investigated whether chiropractic IMT and the addition of education and self-care were superior to no-treatment or IMT alone for 5 outcome measures-interincisal opening range, jaw pain at rest, jaw pain upon opening, jaw pain upon clenching, and global reporting of change-over the course of 1 year. METHODS: Ninety-three participants with myogenous TMD between the ages of 18 and 50 years experiencing chronic jaw pain of longer than 3 months in duration were recruited for the study. Successful applicants were randomized into 1 of 3 groups: (1) IMT consisting of 2 treatment interventions per week for 5 weeks, (2) IMT plus education and "self-care" exercises (IMTESC), and (3) wait-list control. The main outcome measures were used. Range of motion findings were measured by vernier callipers in millimeters, and pain scores were quantified using an 11-point self-reported graded chronic pain scale. Global reporting of change was a 7-point self-reported scale, balanced positively and negatively around a zero midpoint. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in resting, opening and clenching pain, opening scores, and global reporting of change (p < 0.05) in both treatment groups compared with the controls at 6 months and 1 year. There were also significant differences between the 2 treatment groups at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that both chiropractic IMT and IMTESC were superior to no-treatment of chronic myogenous TMD over the course of 1 year, with IMTESC also being superior to IMT at 1 year.
Reprinted from the Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics with copyright permission from the National University of Health Sciences.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help