Introduction: Pain is an emotional experience. As a subjective feeling, it is associated with pathophysiological processes occurring in the central nervous system, which in turn may negatively affect the psychophysical function, cognitive abilities, level of functioning and quality of life. The Aim: The aim of the study was to assess orofacial and general pain location in patients with temporomandibular joint disorder—myofascial pain with referral. Materials and Methods: The study group consisted of 50 randomly selected, generally healthy people with complete natural dentition (37 women and 13 men) at the age of 23.36 ± 2.14 years, referred to the Department of Prosthodontics of the Medical University. All patients underwent clinical examination according to the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (Axes I and II). The subjects were classified as people with myofascial pain with referral. The evaluation of severity of temporomandibular disorders was based on the Temporomandibular Disorder Pain Screener and the Graded Chronic Pain Scale. In order to assess orofacial and general pain location, a bodychart drawing of pain was used. Results: The study group indicated 40 different areas of the body affected by pain. 2–3 isolated pain locations were declared by a total of six subjects. One person identified 17 affected areas. Forty four people reported pain in at least four regions of the body. 70% of patients suffered from pain within the right masseter muscle. Pain of the left masseter muscle was noted in 68% of cases. Cervical ailments were reported by 56% of people. Pain of the left temporomandibular joint was observed in 68% of patients, and of the right one in 54%. Conclusion: The patients with myofascial pain with referral suffer from general ailments in different regions of the body. Only the frequency of pain in the right masseter muscle and right temporomandibular joint differed with respect to gender. The suggestion that the prevalence of pain in other areas of the body varies between men and women has not been confirmed. Due to a small sample size, such differences cannot be excluded. Further studies in this area are needed.

No abstract

The aim of the study was functional evaluation of soft tissue mobilization in patients with temporomandibular disorder-myofascial pain with referral. The study group consisted of 50 individuals—37 females and 13 males. The average age was 23.36 ± 2.14 years. All subjects were diagnosed with myofascial pain with referral (diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders). Soft tissue mobilization was applied three times. Electromyography of selected masticatory muscles was performed six times—before and after the treatment. After each mobilization, a decreasing tendency of muscular activity was observed in the entire study group. The Friedman test indicated that mobilization altered the activity of the right temporal muscle (p = 0.00010), both masseters (p = 0.0000), right sternocleidomastoid (p = 0.00251), left sternocleidomastoid (p = 0.00033), and right and left digastric muscles (p = 0.00045 and p = 0.00000, respectively). With respect to symmetry a statistically significant difference was noted in the case of the sternocleidomastoid muscles (p = 0.00729). In conclusion, soft tissue mobilization seems to be effective in the relaxation of masticatory muscles in patients with temporomandibular disorders. Our findings proved that soft tissue mobilization does not improve the symmetry and synergy of the masticatory muscles limited by dental occlusion.

The aim of the study was to evaluate occlusal parameters in patients with myofascial pain with referral before and after soft tissue mobilization. The study group consisted of 50 people (37 females and 13 males, average age 23.36 ± 2.14 years) diagnosed with myofascial pain with referral. All patients underwent triplicate soft tissue mobilization. Occlusal parameters were evaluated six times, before and after each treatment, using T-scan III. A decreasing tendency of the occlusion time was observed after the first, second, and third therapy. After the third treatment, the mean occlusion time in the entire study group was 0.119 s. The 1st soft tissue mobilization shortened both right and left disclusion times to 0.181 s and 0.185 s, respectively. After the third treatment, these parameters amounted to 0.159 s and 0.165 s, respectively. The Friedman test for the entire study group indicated that soft tissue mobilization altered the occlusion time and both disclusion times (p < 0.05). In conclusion, soft tissue mobilization affects biotensegrity of the masticatory system, thus modifying occlusal parameters. The occlusion time and both disclusion times cannot be considered as cofactors of the existing temporomandibular disorders—myofascial pain with referral.

Background: The temporomandibular joint is the one of the most important joints in the human body. It enables numerous orofacial functions such as mastication, swallowing, breathing, speech, emotional communication, and facial expressions. The aim of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of jaw functional limitations and oral behaviors with respect to general health status in patients with temporomandibular joint disorders—myofascial pain with referral.Materials and methods: The study group consisted of 50 individuals (37 females and 13 males) with complete natural dentition. The average age was 23.36 years with ± 0.30 as a standard error. All subjects underwent clinical examination and were diagnosed with myofascial pain with referral according to the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders. The survey was conducted in connection with the Jaw Functional Limitation Scale-8 (JFLS-8), Jaw Functional Limitation Scale-20 (JFLS-20), Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15), and Oral Behaviors Checklist (OBC).Results: The most common functional problems in the entire study group were chewing tough food and yawning. In terms of gender, statistically significant differences were noted for chewing tough food and smiling (p = 0.015451; p = 0.035978, respectively). With respect to Bonferroni correction and Benjamini-Hochberg procedure, the observed differences were not statistically significant. There were no statistically considerable differences in mastication, mandibular mobility, verbal and emotional communication, or global limitations (p &gt; 0.05). Over half (56%) of the respondents had depression of varying severity. Somatic symptoms of different severity were found in 78% of the patients, and 44% of the respondents declared anxiety disorders. The score of the Oral Behavior Checklist (OBC = 27.18) highlighted a high tendency for developing craniomandibular disorders.Conclusion: Patients with myofascial pain with referral, demonstrated a disturbed biopsychosocial profile. The restrictions in yawning and smiling as well as limitations in mastication, mobility, verbal and emotional communication, and global limitations appear to be significant predictors of craniomandibular dysfunction. Depression, stress, and somatic disorders are important factors predisposing patients to the occurrence of myofascial pain with referral. The progression of oral behaviors may indicate the role of somatosensory amplification.

The aim of the study was to evaluate the temporomandibular joint, the prevalence of single and multiple diagnosis and potential sided domination of temporomandibular dysfunction in patients with temporomandibular disorder—myofascial pain with referral. The study group enrolled 50 people—37 females and 13 males between 18 and 25 years old with an average age of 23.36 ± 2.14. The patients underwent joint vibration analysis. Sixty seven percent of all examined tem-poromandibular joints were classified as group I according to Mark Piper’s classification. Class IIIA appeared in 17% of joints. Eight percent of temporomandibular joints were classified as class IVA. There were no statistically significant differences in the prevalence of temporomandibular disorder with respect to gender (p = 0.838639). The relatively high prevalence of multiple diagnoses proved the overlapping nature of muscle and intraarticular disorders. Twenty eight percent of the subjects suffered from a combination of myofascial pain with referral and bilateral temporoman-dibular dysfunction. In 62% of the patients a lack of intraarticular disorders was reported. The suggestion that there exists sided domination in the occurrence of temporomandibular disorders has not been confirmed. Due to the small sample size, such differences cannot be excluded. Fur-ther research is needed.

The etiology of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) is firmly anchored in the biopsychosocial model in which a special role is attributed to the stress, depression, somatic symptoms, and anxiety. The aim of the study was to assess the level of stress, depression and neck disability in patients with temporomandibular disorder—myofascial pain with referral. The study group enrolled 50 people (37 women and 13 men) with complete natural dentition. All the patients underwent a clinical examination according to the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders and were diagnosed as individuals with myofascial pain with referral. The questionnaires were associated with stress, depression, and neck disability; Perceived Stress Scale (PSS−10), Beck Depression Inventory(BDI), and Neck Disability Index (NDI) were evaluated. Of the individuals evaluated, 78% showed elevated levels of stress, and the average value of the PSS−10 in the study group was 18 points (Me = 17). Furthermore, 30% of the subjects presented depressive symptoms, with the average value of BDI was 8.94 points (Me = 8), and 82% of the subjects showed neck disability. The multiple linear regression model revealed that BDI and NDI allowed explanations for the 53% differentiation of PSS−10. In conclusion, stress, depression, and neck disability coexist with temporomandibular disorder—myofascial pain with referral.