Objective To conduct a systematic review analyzing disease definitions and diagnostic criteria used in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving burning mouth syndrome (BMS). Methods A systematic search conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database/Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar that included RCTs on BMS published between 1994 and 2017 was performed. Results Considerable variability in BMS disease definitions and diagnostic criteria used created substantial heterogeneity in the selection of participants and weakened the rigor of the 36 RCTs identified. The analyzed RCTs routinely under‐reported the methods used to rule in or out study participants and the number of individuals excluded from BMS RCTs. Conclusions Our findings indicate that a large proportion of participants enrolled in these studies may have had an underlying condition that could have explained their BMS symptoms. Thus, outcomes of therapeutic interventions from these BMS RCTs should be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneous disease definitions and diagnostic criteria. In order to improve the quality of clinical trials, future research should focus on establishing consensus for a single definition of BMS that includes specific inclusion and exclusion criteria that should be used to select study participants for clinical trials.
Objectives To determine the frequency of use of the core outcome domains published by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) in burning mouth syndrome (BMS) randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods This systematic review, conducted as part of the World Workshop on Oral Medicine VII (WWOM VII), was performed by searching the literature for studies published in PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database/Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar from January 1994 (when the first BMS definition came out) through October 2017. Results A total of 36 RCTs (n = 2,175 study participants) were included and analyzed. The overall reporting of the IMMPACT core and supplemental outcome domains was low even after the publication of the IMMPACT consensus papers in 2003 and 2005 (mean before IMMPACT consensus publication = 2.6 out of 6; mean after IMMPACT publication = 3.8 out of 6). Use of validated assessment tools recommended by the IMMPACT consensus was scarce (1.9 out of 6). None of the RCTs reviewed cited the IMMPACT consensus papers. Conclusions The underreporting of IMMPACT outcome domains in BMS RCTs is significant. Raising awareness regarding the existence of standardized outcome domains in chronic pain research is essential to ensure more accurate, comparable, and consistent interpretation of RCT findings that can be clinically translatable.
Objectives To determine the effectiveness of systemic pharmacotherapeutic interventions compared to placebo in burning mouth syndrome (BMS) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) based on the core outcome domains recommended by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT). Methods A systematic literature review of RCTs, concerning systemic pharmacotherapeutic interventions for BMS, published from January 1994 through October 2019, and meta‐analysis was performed. Results Fourteen RCTs (n = 734 participants) were included. Of those, nine were eligible for the quantitative assessment due to the availability/homogeneity of data for at least one of the IMMPACT domains. Pain intensity was the only domain reported in all RCTs. Weighted mean changes in pain intensity, based on visual analogue scale (ΔVAS), were reported in three RCTs at 6 ± 2 weeks and only one RCT at 10+ weeks follow‐ups. Quantitative assessment, based on ΔVAS, yielded very low evidence for the effectiveness of alpha‐lipoic acid and clonazepam, low evidence for effectiveness of trazodone and melatonin, and moderate evidence for herbal compounds. Conclusions Based on the RCTs studied, variable levels of evidence exist that suggest that select pharmacological interventions are associated with improved symptoms. However, the underreporting of IMMPACT domains in BMS RCTs restricts the multidimensional assessment of systemic interventions outcomes. Standardized outcome measures need to be applied to future RCTs to improve understanding of intervention outcomes.
ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness of topical interventions in the management of burning mouth syndrome (BMS), based on the core outcome domains recommended by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT).MethodsA systematic literature review of RCTs on topical interventions for the management of BMS, published in PubMed, Web of Science, PsycInfo, Cochrane Database/Central, and Google Scholar through May 2021 was performed.ResultsEight RCTs (n = 358 study participants) were included in this study. Due to underreporting of IMMPACT domains, publication bias, high degree of heterogeneity between studies, meta‐analysis was not undertaken. Based on changes in visual analogue pain scores (ΔVAS), the most reported outcome, the effectiveness of the topical interventions was demonstrated; however, it is low level of evidence.ConclusionsHigh levels of variability (interventions, outcomes, outcome measurement tools, and intervention effects evaluated), heterogeneity, publication bias, and underreporting of IMMPACT domains were observed across the RCTs. This systematic review highlights the need for application of standardized outcome measures to future RCTs. At the present time, there is lack of moderate‐strong evidence on short‐ and long‐term outcomes to support or refute the use of any particular topical intervention in managing BMS. Future RCTs with standardized outcome measures are needed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.