What is the minimal important difference of pain intensity, mandibular function, and headache impact in patients with temporomandibular disorders? Clinical significance analysis of a randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 102108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Letícia Bojikian Calixtre ◽  
Ana Beatriz Oliveira ◽  
Francisco Alburquerque-Sendín ◽  
Susan Armijo-Olivo
Trials ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aroldo dos Santos Aguiar ◽  
Cesar Bataglion ◽  
Lilian Ramiro Felício ◽  
Beatriz Azevedo ◽  
Thaís Cristina Chaves

Abstract The objective of this study will be to investigate the additional effect of pain neuroscience education program compared to a craniocervical manual therapy and exercises program for pain intensity and disability in patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD). This study will be a randomized controlled trial comprising a sample of 148 participants. Subjects between 18 and 55 years, both genders, will undergo a screening process to confirm painful TMD by the Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC/TMD), and then the volunteers will be randomized into two groups (G1: pain neuroscience education + craniocervical manual therapy and exercises vs. G2: craniocervical manual therapy and exercises). The volunteers will be recruited at the dentistry clinic. The intervention will be administered twice a week for 6 weeks by a single therapist lasting 1 h per session. The primary outcome will be pain intensity and disability and the secondary outcomes will be pain self-efficacy, kinesiophobia, and global perceived effect of improvement. The participants will be assessed immediately after the last session and at one- and three-month follow-ups. All statistical analyses will be conducted following intention-to-treat principles, and the treatment effects will be calculated using linear mixed models. The results of this study may contribute to understand the additional effect of pain neuroscience education intervention on TMD patients submitted to manual therapy and exercise. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03926767. Registered on April 29, 2019.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 793-800
Author(s):  
Ane S. Nygaard ◽  
Gro K. Haugstad ◽  
Tom Wilsgaard ◽  
Pål Øian ◽  
Mona Stedenfeldt

AbstractBackground and aimsWomen with chronic pelvic pain represent a heterogeneous group, and it is suggested that the existence of sub-groups can explain varying results and inconclusiveness in clinical trials. Some predictors of treatment outcome are suggested, but the evidence is limited. The primary aim of this study was to explore if selected pre-treatment characteristics of the participants in a recently conducted randomized controlled trial were associated with treatment outcome.MethodsIn this study secondary analysis of data collected in a randomized trial were conducted. The participants were women with chronic pelvic pain randomized to two different physical therapy treatments. Analyses in this study were performed for the whole group as a cohort. The primary outcome measure was change in pain intensity from baseline to 12 months, measured with the numeric rating scale (0–10). The women were asked to rate their mean pelvic pain intensity during the last 7 days. Based on previous research and on available variables from the randomized controlled trial four potential predictive factors were derived from the baseline data and assessed one by one in a linear regression model, adjusted for age and treatment group. The variables with strongest association (p < 0.10) with the primary outcome were further included in a multivariable linear regression model with backward selection, adjusted for age and treatment group.ResultsFifty women (mean age 38.1, SD = 12.2) were included in the analysis. For these women the mean change in pain intensity was −1.2 points (95% CI −1.8 to −0.7) from baseline to 12 months. The multivariable regression model showed that pelvic pain duration of 6 years or more was associated with less decrease in pain intensity with a regression coefficient of 1.3 (95% CI 0.3–2.4). Baseline pain intensity was associated with higher pain reduction after PT treatment with a regression coefficient per SD increase in baseline pain of −0.6 (95% CI −1.1 to −0.1). None of the women with main pain site other places than in the pelvis reported any pain reduction after physical therapy treatment, but due to the small numbers the predictor was not included in the regression analysis.ConclusionsWe identified that pelvic pain duration of 6 years or more was associated with less pain reduction, and that higher baseline pain intensity was associated with higher pain reduction after physical therapy treatment in this sample of women with chronic pelvic pain. For the variable main pain site other places than the pelvis the results are unsure due to small numbers.ImplicationsBased on our finding of long pain duration as a negative predictor for pain reduction, we emphasize that early intervention is important. Many of the participants in our RCT reported pelvic surgeries or other treatments prior to referral for PT, and we suggest that referral to a non-invasive intervention such as PT should be considered at an earlier stage. In order to tailor interventions to the individual women’s needs, thorough baseline assessments, preferably in a multidisciplinary setting, should be performed.


Author(s):  
Ni Made Oka Dwicandra ◽  
Antonious Adji Prayitno Setiadi

Objective: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a progressive chronic disease with the loss of articular cartilage. In managing OA, inadequate pain relief (IPR) often occurs, particularly with a single non steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) therapy. In this research, pain outcome of OA patients treated with a combination of diacerein and meloxicam vs meloxicam alone was evaluated.Methods: This research was conducted at rumah sakit umum daerah (RSUD) Dr. Mohammad Soewandhie Surabaya by using randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. Pain outcome was evaluated by pain intensity and area under the curve (AUC) of pain score in week 0-4th.Results: There were a significantly different (p<0.05) in pain intensity seen in 3rd and 4th weeks after treated with a combination of diacerein and meloxicam, and with meloxicam only. However, there were no different in AUC pain score between combination and single therapy.Conclusion: Combination therapy of diacerein and meloxicam was more effective than meloxicam alone. A significant effect of a combination therapy of diacerein and meloxicam occurred at 3rd weeks. The prolong study in order to get the differences in AUC pain score are needed.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 1665 ◽  
Author(s):  
Santiago Garcia-de-Miguel ◽  
Daniel Pecos-Martin ◽  
Tamara Larroca-Sanz ◽  
Beatriz Sanz-de-Vicente ◽  
Laura Garcia-Montes ◽  
...  

Procedures such as dry needling (DN) or percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (PENS) are commonly proposed for the treatment of myofascial trigger points (MTrP). The aim of the present study is to investigate if PENS is more effective than DN in the short term in subjects with mechanical neck pain. This was an evaluator-blinded randomized controlled trial. Subjects were recruited through announcements and randomly allocated into DN or PENS groups. Pain intensity, disability, pressure pain threshold (PPT), range of motion (ROM), and side-bending strength were measured. The analyses included mixed-model analyses of variance and pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction. The final sample was composed of 44 subjects (22 per group). Both groups showed improvements in pain intensity (ηp2 = 0.62; p < 0.01), disability (ηp2 = 0.74; p < 0.01), PPT (ηp2 = 0.79; p < 0.01), and strength (ηp2 = 0.37; p < 0.01). The PENS group showed greater improvements in disability (mean difference, 3.27; 95% CI, 0.27–6.27) and PPT (mean difference, 0.88–1.35; p < 0.01). Mixed results were obtained for ROM. PENS seems to produce greater improvements in PPT and disability in the short term.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document