Assessing stress associated with temporomandibular joint disorder through Fonseca's anamnestic index among the Saudi physicians

Abstract

The study aims to investigate signs and symptoms of temporomandibular disorders (TMD) among physicians in a tertiary health‐care center. It has estimated the level of symptomatology, determined the association with demographic data, and identified the related occupational risk factors. A cross‐sectional survey was used, and physicians of genders, all age groups, and nationalities from King Abdulaziz Medical City in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, were recruited. Subjects who had rheumatic arthritis, osteoarthritis, trigeminal neuralgia, or temporomandibular joint (TMJ) trauma were excluded. The data were collected through a self‐administered questionnaire that measured TMD severity and oral parafunctional behaviors. Fonseca's anamnestic index (FAI) and an oral validated behavior checklist were used to assess the signs and symptoms of TMD. A total of 282 physicians participated in the study, and the prevalence of TMD signs among physicians was 37% (106); among them, 88 (83%) were within the light dysfunction category. Female physicians reported significantly higher FAI than males for side‐to‐side mandibular movement (12% vs. 5%, P = 0.04), reporting ear pain (18% vs. 10%, P = 0.04), and noticing clicking when chewing or opening the mouth (35% vs. 20%, P = 0.006). Younger practitioners (28–31 years old) who reported clicking while chewing or opening the mouth tended to have reported higher TMD dysfunction (35%) than those aged 40 and above (13%; P = 0.007). Self‐reported signs of TMD were 37% among our population. Information collected from FAI is useful in early diagnosis and prevention of TMD.

Prevalence of temporomandibular joint disorder in the Lebanese population, and its association with depression, anxiety, and stress

“…Temporomandibular joint disorder is a group of pain conditions that affect the function of the temporomandibular joint, along with the muscles of mastication [ 1 , 2 ]. Pain in the area around the temporomandibular joint, can be due to diseases from inside the articulation, from adjacent structures, or from a combination of both [ 3 ].…”

Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the Fonseca anamnestic index for temporomandibular disorders

“…15,17,18 The FAI has been utilised by clinicians and researchers for clinical screening and prevalence studies that have public health policy practice and policy implications. [18][19][20][21][22][23] The FAI was originally developed in Portuguese and translated into English. [18][19][20][21][22][23] Although the English FAI is widely used, it has limited utility in countries and cohorts based on the Chinese language due to literacy and cultural issues.…”

“…[18][19][20][21][22][23] The FAI was originally developed in Portuguese and translated into English. [18][19][20][21][22][23] Although the English FAI is widely used, it has limited utility in countries and cohorts based on the Chinese language due to literacy and cultural issues. For the FAI to be employed in China and other Chinese literate populations, it needs to be translated into the Chinese language and the translated instrument must be assessed for reliability and validity.…”

“…14 It was developed based on the Helkimo index and has been mooted as a simple, low-cost, patient-reported TMDs assessment tool. [18][19][20][21][22][23] The FAI was originally developed in Portuguese and translated into English. 16 It has high accuracy, sensitivity and specificity for identifying myogenous TMDs in community samples and allows severity of TMDs to be graded.…”

“…15 The FAI was found to be consistent with other instruments used to screen and diagnose TMDs including the American Association of Orofacial Pain Questionnaire and the Jaw Symptom and Oral Habit Questionnaire. [18][19][20][21][22][23] Although the English FAI is widely used, it has limited utility in countries and cohorts based on the Chinese language due to literacy and cultural issues. 15,17,18 The FAI has been utilised by clinicians and researchers for clinical screening and prevalence studies that have public health policy practice and policy implications.…”