Aims The original Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) Axis I diagnostic algorithms have been demonstrated to be reliable. However, the Validation Project determined that the RDC/TMD Axis I validity was below the target sensitivity of ≥ 0.70 and specificity of ≥ 0.95. Consequently, these empirical results supported the development of revised RDC/TMD Axis I diagnostic algorithms that were subsequently demonstrated to be valid for the most common pain-related TMD and for one temporomandibular joint (TMJ) intra-articular disorder. The original RDC/TMD Axis II instruments were shown to be both reliable and valid. Working from these findings and revisions, two international consensus workshops were convened, from which recommendations were obtained for the finalization of new Axis I diagnostic algorithms and new Axis II instruments. Methods Through a series of workshops and symposia, a panel of clinical and basic science pain experts modified the revised RDC/TMD Axis I algorithms by using comprehensive searches of published TMD diagnostic literature followed by review and consensus via a formal structured process. The panel's recommendations for further revision of the Axis I diagnostic algorithms were assessed for validity by using the Validation Project's data set, and for reliability by using newly collected data from the ongoing TMJ Impact Project—the follow-up study to the Validation Project. New Axis II instruments were identified through a comprehensive search of the literature providing valid instruments that, relative to the RDC/TMD, are shorter in length, are available in the public domain, and currently are being used in medical settings. Results The newly recommended Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD) Axis I protocol includes both a valid screener for detecting any pain-related TMD as well as valid diagnostic criteria for differentiating the most common pain-related TMD (sensitivity ≥ 0.86, specificity ≥ 0.98) and for one intra-articular disorder (sensitivity of 0.80 and specificity of 0.97). Diagnostic criteria for other common intra-articular disorders lack adequate validity for clinical diagnoses but can be used for screening purposes. Inter-examiner reliability for the clinical assessment associated with the validated DC/TMD criteria for pain-related TMD is excellent (kappa ≥ 0.85). Finally, a comprehensive classification system that includes both the common and less common TMD is also presented. The Axis II protocol retains selected original RDC/TMD screening instruments augmented with new instruments to assess jaw function as well as behavioral and additional psychosocial factors. The Axis II protocol is divided into screening and comprehensive self-report instrument sets. The screening instruments’ 41 questions assess pain intensity, pain-related disability, psychological distress, jaw functional limitations, and parafunctional behaviors, and a pain drawing is used to assess locations of pain. The comprehensive instruments, composed of 81 questions, assess i...

This study did not find convincing evidence of a causal association between periodontal disease and CHD risk. JAMA. 2000;284:1406-1410.

No abstract

The German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain (DFNS) has recommended a protocol with 13 quantitative sensory testing (QST) measures for detecting somatosensory abnormalities. Reliability is an important scientific property and has been adequately tested for cutaneous QST. This study evaluates intraoral sites for which no reliability trials have yet been published. Inter- and intra-examiner reliability of 13 QST measures at intra- and extraoral trigeminal sites were investigated. Twenty-one healthy volunteers from Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden (13 women and 8 men, mean age 40.4 years, range 24-71) participated. Two independent examiners previously trained in the DFNS QST protocol examined the participants using the entire protocol. Each participant was examined twice on the same day, once by each examiner (inter-examiner reliability). After 1-3 weeks, one examiner re-examined all participants (intra-examiner reliability). The measurements were made on the skin of the right cheek, the tip of the tongue, and bilaterally on the gingival mucosa of the upper premolar region. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) or kappa was used to calculate variations. Most tests had acceptable to excellent inter-examiner (ICC 0.41-0.89) and intra-examiner (ICC 0.43-0.87) reliability. For each test, inter- and intra-examiner reliabilities at intra- and extraoral sites were similar. No significant differences between right and left sides were found intraorally. We conclude that inter- and intra-examiner reliabilities of most QST measures are acceptable for assessing somatosensory function in the orofacial region.

Temporomandibular Disorders (TMD) encompass several entities, which may have differing etiologies. To test this hypothesis, we investigated risk factors for three diagnostic subgroups of painful TMD. Ninety-seven subjects with myofascial pain only, 20 with arthralgia only, 157 with both myofascial pain and arthralgia, and 195 controls without TMD pain met criteria for study eligibility. Investigated risk factors included both physical and psychological variables. Adjusted odds ratios were calculated by multiple logistic regression analyses. Myofascial pain occurring alone was significantly associated with trauma (Odds Ratio [OR] = 2.0), clenching (OR = 4.8), third molar removal (OR = 3.2), somatization (OR = 3.7), and female gender (OR = 4.2). Myofascial pain with arthralgia was significantly associated with trauma (OR = 2.1), clenching (OR = 3.3), third molar removal (OR = 4.0), somatization (OR = 5.1), and female gender (OR = 4.7). No significant associations were found for the small-arthralgia-only group.