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
 
 
 
 
 
FacebookTwitter
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:
Summer 2011
Volume 25 , Issue 3

Back
Share Abstract:

Development and Validation of a Screening Checklist for Temporomandibular Disorders

Nan Nan Zhao, BDS, MDSc/R. Wendell Evans, BDS, MDS, DDSc/Karen Byth, BSc, MSc, PhD, DIC, CStat RSS/Greg M. Murray, BDS, MDS, PhD, FRACDS, FICD/Christopher C. Peck, BDS, MScDent, PhD, FICD

Pages: 210222
PMID: 21837288

Aims: To develop and validate a short screening tool for temporomandibular disorders (TMD) from the comprehensive Research Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (RDC/TMD) assessment. Methods: Complete RDC/TMD assessments of four subject groups (96 TMD; 102 dental pain; 68 headache; 115 no-pain patients) were compared. Classification tree and multiple logistic regression analyses were utilized to develop the tool. To test external validity, a further 54 TMD and 51 non-TMD subjects whose diagnoses had been established by RDC/TMD assessment were reassessed with the new screening tool. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and likelihood ratios (LRs) were calculated for the screening tool in the validation set of subjects. Results: A short TMD checklist was developed. This screening instrument had sensitivity of 94.4% (95% confidence intervals [CI], 84.9% to 98.1%), specificity of 94.1% (95% CI, 84.1% to 98%), PPV of 94.4% (95% CI, 84.9% to 98.1%), NPV of 94.1% (95% CI, 84.1% to 98%), and positive and negative LRs of 16.056 (95% CI, 5.346 to 48.219) and 0.059 (95% CI, 0.02 to 0.178) in an independent validation set. Conclusion: A short TMD screening checklist with high validity has been developed. This checklist may have good utility in general practice as a primary screening tool for TMD. J OROFAC PAIN 2011;25:210222

Key words: Research Diagnostic Criteria for TMD, screening, temporomandibular disorders, validity

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