Objectives: The peak prevalence of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) may occur in middle age. This study determined the proportion of matured adults seeking TMD treatment and compared their diagnostic, psychological and oral health-related quality-of-life (OHRQoL) profiles to younger patients. Methods: Adult subjects were recruited from a tertiary TMD centre and assigned to three age groups, namely 18-44 years (young adults [YA]), 45-64 (middle-aged adults [MA]) and ≥65 (old adults [OA]). TMD diagnoses were established with the Diagnostic Criteria for TMDs and categorised as pain-related (PT), intra-articular (IT) and combined (CT) TMDs. Psychological states and OHRQoL were assessed with the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21 (DASS-21) and Oral Health Impact Profile-TMDs (OHIP-TMDs). Demographic, DASS-21, and OHIP-TMDs data were analysed using chi-square test, one-way ANOVA and Pearson's correlation (P < .05). Results: Middle-aged (19.7%; 136/692) and old (4.0%; 28/692) adults comprised about a quarter of the TMD patients. Although gender distribution was comparable, significant differences in TMD categories were observed (P < .001). Pain-related TMDs were more prevalent in the MA/OA groups while intra-articular TMDs were more frequent in the YA group. No significant difference in DASS-21 and total OHIP scores was noted among three groups. However, the MA and OA groups had significantly lower OHRQoL in the physical pain domain. Correlations between DASS-21 and OHIP-TMDs scores varied with age and ranged from r s = 0.47-0.92. Conclusions: Matured patients constituted a quarter of TMD cohort and presented higher frequencies of painful TMDs. They have similar psychological profiles to younger patients but experienced lower OHRQoL in physical pain domain.
Background The Fonseca anamnestic index (FAI) offers a simple, low‐cost, patient‐reported method for screening temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). Objectives This study described the development of the Chinese version of the FAI (FAI‐C) and examined its reliability and validity when compared to the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD). Methods The FAI‐C was created by translation and cross‐cultural adaptation of the English instrument following international guidelines. Psychometric evaluation of the FAI‐C was carried out on a sample of 613 patients with TMDs and 57 controls. Reliability of the FAI‐C was determined by means of internal consistency and test‐retest methods while validity was ascertained by criterion‐related validity. Criterion validity was examined via Cohen's kappa, sensitivity and specificity when compared with DC/TMD Axis I diagnoses. Results Cronbach's alpha value (internal consistency) for total FAI‐C score was 0.669, and intra‐class correlation coefficient (ICC) value (test‐retest reliability) was 0.823. For criterion validity, kappa coefficient value was 0.633 while sensitivity and specificity was 95.9% and 71.9%, respectively. Conclusion The Chinese version of the FAI demonstrated acceptable reliability and good validity. The FAI‐C could thus be used as an instrument for screening TMDs in Chinese literate populations.
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.