Counseling and oral splint for conservative treatment of temporomandibular dysfunction: preliminary study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction Temporoamndiular Disorders (TMD) involve the masticatory muscles, temporomandibular joint (TMJ) or both. The most common symptom is pain, which is usually located in the muscles of mastication, pre-auricular region, and / or ATM, especially during mandibular function. The main treatment for TMD is related to pain relief. Objective The purpose of this case report was to evaluate the reduction of pain symptoms using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) of patients with TMD treated with counseling and use of occlusal splint (OS). Material and method 16 subjects had participated in this study, that was composed by 4 appointment with 7-day interval between each (CEP FOP / Unicamp – 137/2009). In the first, an examiner used the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC / TMD) to diagnose each patient and delivered a VAS to register the intensity of daily pain. In the second, counseling, molding of both dental arcs to fabricate the OS and the delivery of new VAS were performed. In the third, there was the installation and adjustment of the OS and the delivery of another scale, and in the last, possible adjustments on the OS were done. Data were analyzed by ANOVA two way and Tukey post-test at 5% significance level. Result There was significant difference when comparing the intensity of pain of individuals after installation of splint with the baseline data and after counseling (p = 0.05). Conclusion According to the result of this study, the treatment of TMD associating counseling occlusal splint is effective in reducing pain intensity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".