MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Is there a superiority of multimodal as opposed to simple therapy in patients with temporomandibular disorders? A qualitative systematic review of the literature

2007· review· en· W2047887531 on OpenAlexaff
Jens C. Türp, Asbjørn Jokstad, Edith Motschall, Hans J. Schindler, Isabelle Windecker‐Gétaz, Dominik A. Ettlin

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Oral Implants Research · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicTemporomandibular Joint Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCochrane LibraryMEDLINEPhysical therapyMultimodal therapyPsychological interventionModalitiesSystematic reviewManual therapyAlternative medicineRandomized controlled trialSurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Pain is the most common motivation for patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) to seek care. Therapeutic options range from patient education to joint surgery. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review of articles reporting on simple and multimodal management strategies in TMD patients. 'Simple therapy' was defined as care provided by a dentist, without using technical dental interventions, whereas 'multimodal' refers to at least two different modalities. We followed the null hypothesis of no difference between these two approaches. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic search was carried out in the following databases: Ovid Medline (1966-2006), Cochrane Library (Issue 3/2006), and Science Citation Index (1945-2006). Subsequently, the reference lists of the identified articles were searched to find additional pertinent publications. We divided the study reports according to the main presenting symptom: (1) disc displacement without reduction, with pain; (2) TMD pain, without major psychological symptoms; and (3) TMD pain, with major psychological symptoms. RESULTS: Eleven articles representing nine different clinical studies were identified. (1) In the disc displacement group with pain, multimodal therapy was not superior to explanation and advice. (2) A combination of occlusal appliance and biofeedback-assisted relaxation/stress management was not significantly superior to either of these therapies after 6 months. Furthermore, brief information alone or combined with relaxation training or occlusal appliance, respectively, were equally efficacious at the 6-month follow-up. There was no superiority of multimodal therapy including splints as compared with simple care. A slightly better outcome was reported for a combination of education and home physical therapy regimen than for patient education alone. (3) In temporomandibular pain patients with major psychological disturbances, patients benefited more from a combined therapeutic approach compared with simple care. CONCLUSION: Current research suggests that individuals without major psychological symptoms do not require more than simple therapy. In contrast, patients with major psychological involvement need multimodal, interdisciplinary therapeutic strategies. The clinician's acceptance of the importance of psychological factors in TMD pain forms the platform for convincingly educating patients about the need for multimodal management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.349
GPT teacher head0.639
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations108
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Oral Implants ResearchSame topicTemporomandibular Joint DisordersFrench-language works237,207