Home Subscription Services
 
   

 
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache
OFPH Home Page
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Accepted Manuscripts
Submit
Author Guidelines
Submission Form
Reprints / Articles
Permissions
Advertising
MEDLINE Search
 
 
 
 
 
FacebookTwitterYouTube
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: OFPH
Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache

Edited by Barry J. Sessle, BDS, MDS, BSc, PhD, FRSC

Official Journal of the American Academy of Orofacial Pain,
the European, Asian, and Ibero-Latin Academies of Craniomandibular
Disorders, and the Australian Academy of Orofacial Pain

ISSN 2333-0384 (print) • ISSN 2333-0376 (online)

Publication:
Spring 2009
Volume 23 , Issue 2

Back
Share Abstract:

Diagnostic Accuracy of Temporomandibular Disorder Pain Tests: A Multicenter Study

Corine M. Visscher, PT, PhD, Machiel Naeije, PhD, Antoon De Laat, LDS, GHO, Ambra Michelotti, DDS, Maria Nilner, DDS, PhD, Bart Craane, RPT, EwaCarin Ekberg, DDS, PhD, Mauro Farella, DDS, PhD, Frank Lobbezoo, DDS, PhD

Pages: 108114
PMID: 19492535

Aims: To estimate the diagnostic accuracy of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) clinical examination and of the dynamic/static tests for the recognition of TMD pain. Since the diagnosis of TMD pain is especially complicated in persistent orofacial pain patients, the test outcomes in persistent TMD pain patients were contrasted to those in two control groups: a group of persistent dental pain patients and a group of pain-free subjects. Methods: In 125 persistent TMD pain patients, 88 persistent dental pain patients, and 121 pain-free subjects, a blind and standardized clinical examination was performed. Results: For the RDC/TMD, sensitivity (88%) was high and specificity was low (pain-free group: 71%; dental pain group: 45%). For the dynamic/static tests, sensitivity was 65% and specificities were 91% and 84%, respectively. Comparing the outcomes of the two examinations showed higher positive likelihood ratios for dynamic/static tests (P < .001), and lower negative likelihood ratios for the RDC/TMD examination (P < .01). Conclusion: For the confirmation of a suspicion of TMD pain, it is better to rely on positive dynamic/static tests. To confirm the absence of TMD pain, it is better to rely on a negative RDC/TMD examination. J Orofac Pain 2009;23:108114.

Key words: dental pain, diagnostic accuracy, dynamic/static tests, RDC, TMD

Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files. This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.
  © 2014 Quintessence Publishing Co Inc
 

Home | Subscription Services | Books | Journals | Multimedia | Events | Blog
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Advertising | Help | Sitemap | Catalog