Background: The Fonseca Anamnestic Index (FAI) offers a simple method to screen temporomandibular disorders (TMD). This study aimed to validate the Spanish version of the FAI in patients with TMD. Methods: The sample consisted of 125 subjects (66 TMD and 59 controls) aged over 18 years. Construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, concurrent validity and capacity to discriminate between TMD and healthy subjects were analyzed. Results: The Spanish version of the FAI showed a structure formed by three factors. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.826. The reliability of the items varied between substantial to almost perfect and was excellent for the total score (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.937). The standard error of measurement (SEM) was 6.52, with a minimum detectable change (MDC) of 12.78. FAI score showed a significant correlation with headache, neck pain and vertigo measurements. A cut-off point >35 showed a sensitivity = 83.33% and a specificity = 77.97% in differentiating between healthy and TMD patients, with an area under the curve (AUC) = 0.865. Conclusions: The Spanish version of the FAI is a valid and reliable instrument for diagnosing people with TMD, with appropriate general clinimetric properties. Discrimination between patients with and without TMD is excellent.

The Helkimo Clinical Dysfunction Index (HCDI) is a simple and quick test used to evaluate subjects affected by temporomandibular disorders (TMDs), and its psychometric properties have not been tested. The test evaluates movement, joint function, pain and musculature, providing a quick general overview that could be very useful at different levels of care. For this reason, the aim of this study was to validate the use of the HCDI in a sample of patients with TMD. Methods: The sample consisted of 107 subjects, 60 TMD patients and 47 healthy controls. The study evaluated concurrent validity, inter-rater concordance and predictive values. Results: The HCDI showed moderate to substantial inter-rater concordance among the items and excellent concordance for the total scores. The correlation with other TMD assessment tests was high, the correlation with dizziness was moderate and the correlation with neck pain, headache and overall quality of life was poor. The prediction of TMD showed a sensitivity of 86.67%, a specificity of 68.09% and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.841. Conclusions: The HCDI is a valid and reliable assessment instrument; its clinimetric properties are adequate, and it has a good ability to discriminate between TMD-affected and TMD-unaffected subjects.

The Short Form of the Fonseca Anamnestic Index (SFAI) is a simple and quick questionnaire used for screening temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). The present study aimed to validate the Spanish version of the SFAI in patients with TMDs. The study sample comprised 112 subjects (50 TMDs and 52 controls). Test–retest reliability, factorial validity, internal consistency, concurrent validity, and the SFAI’s ability to discriminate between TMDs subjects and healthy controls were analyzed using the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD protocol) as the reference. Factor analysis showed a single factor that explained 63% of the total variance. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.849. The reliability of the items measured with the Kappa index showed values from 0.767 to 0.888. Test–retest reliability was substantial (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.837). The total SFAI score showed a significant correlation with orofacial pain, vertigo, and neck disability measurements. For a cut-off point of >10 points, the SFAI showed a sensitivity of 78% and specificity of 78.85% at differentiating between TMDs patients and healthy subjects, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.852. The Spanish version of the SFAI is a valid and reliable instrument for diagnosing people with TMDs and shows generally good psychometric properties.

The Krogh-Poulsen Test is a classic instrument to measure dysfunction of the stomatognathic system whose psychometric properties are unknown. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Krogh-Poulsen Test for the diagnosis of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). A cross-sectional study was designed, including 119 patients (63 patients with TMD and 56 healthy controls). Factorial validity, inter-rater reliability, error of measurement, diagnostic validity of the Krogh-Poulsen Test, and concurrent validity were analyzed. The Krogh-Poulsen Test showed a three-factor structure. The inter-rater agreement could be considered very good with a kappa index of 0.87 (95% CI 0.83–0.90) and Standard Error of Measurement of 0.79. Correlations were strong with other orofacial instruments, moderate with instruments measuring TMD-related disorders such as neck pain, headache, or dizziness, and poor with generic quality of life instruments. The Area under the Curve ROC was 0.928 showing, for a cut-off point >1, a sensitivity of 90.48 (95% CI 80.4–96.4) and a specificity of 85.71 (95% CI 73.8–93.6) for the diagnosis of TMD disorders. The Krogh-Poulsen Test showed a three-factor structure, very good inter-rater reliability, a strong correlation with other orofacial instruments, and an excellent capacity to discriminate between patients with or without TMD.

Background. The Fonseca Anamnestic Index (FAI) offers a simple method to screen temporomandibular disorders (TMD). This study aimed to validate the standard version of the FAI in a Spanish population and to analyze the clinimetric properties of the Spanish version of the FAI in patients with TMD.Methods. The sample consisted of 179 subjects aged over 18 years, of which 119 were diagnosed with TMD and 60 were healthy controls. Construct validity (exploratory factor analysis), internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and concurrent validity were analyzed. To discriminate between patients with and without TMD, Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed.Results. The Spanish version of the FAI showed construct validity formed by three factors. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.820, indicating good internal consistency. The reliability of the items measured with the weighted kappa coefficient was between 0.588 and 0.899, varying between moderate to almost perfect. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) of the total score was 0.938, indicating excellent reliability. The standard error of measurement (SEM) was 6.42, with a minimum detectable change (MDC) of 12.59 points. The concurrent validity showed a significant correlation with headache, neck pain, vertigo and the Mental Component Summary (SF-12 MCS) of the SF-12. However, the relationship with the Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS) was not significant. The ROC curve analysis showed a good accuracy of the FAI in differentiating between healthy and TMD patients with an area under the curve (AUC) = 0.869, corresponding to a cut-off point for the FAI of >35 points, with a sensitivity = 83.19% and a specificity = 78.33%.Conclusions. The Spanish version of the FAI is a valid and reliable instrument for diagnosing people with TMD, with appropriate general clinimetric properties. Discrimination between patients with and without TMD is excellent.