Management of Temporomandibular Disorders with Low Level Laser Therapy

Sayed, Nabeel; Murugavel, C; Gnanam, A.

doi:10.1007/s12663-013-0544-1

Cited by 43 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The improvement in mandibular movements in the group treated with laser could not be attributed to its recognized analgesic effect as claimed by Núñez et al 32 . The observed improvement in mandibular movements (MIO) in the current study is in accordance with those of other studies [33][34][35] . Variability within individuals might be reflect the effect of psychological factors, such as the desire to feel better which may have influenced physiological processes thereby resulting in the desired outcome.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Dextrose Prolotherapy versus Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) for Management of Temporomandibular Joint Disorders (TMD): Clinical Randomized controlled Study

Hassanien

Kamel

Rashed

2020

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare the effects of dextrose prolotherapy and low level laser therapy in terms of the pain (VAS) and maximum interincisal opening (MIO) in treatment of temporomandibular disorders. Patients and Methods:Twenty patients (10 males & 10 females) with temporomandibular disorders TMD participated in this clinical trial. All patients were randomly divided into two equal groups. In dextrose group; 12.5% Dextrose was injected into 3 targeted areas, the posterior joint space, the anterior disc attachment and superior attachment of masseter muscle. Dextrose prolotherapy was performed at 2 weeks, and 4 weeks intervals. In laser group; semi conductive (diode) gallium arsenide (Ga As) laser was utilized in this study. The therapeutic LLLT application was performed 3 times per week for four consecutive weeks. The primary outcome measure was the severity of the pain at rest assessed with visual analogue scale (0-10 cm). The secondary outcome measure was Maximum interincisal opening (MIO). All the evaluations in both groups were done at baseline, 2 weeks, and 4 weeks subsequent to the treatment.Results :The results demonstrated insignificant difference between the means of dextrose prolotherapy and laser groups in terms of VAS (at rest), MIO degree values before treatment (base line) (p>0.05). When the changes in the groups after treatment were compared, there was no significant difference between the means of dextrose and laser groups regarding VAS (at rest) after 2 weeks and 4 weeks (p-value>0.05). However, there was a statistical significant difference (P-value = 0.001) between the means of both groups regarding MIO after 2 weeks and 4 weeks (P-value <0.001). The improvement in maximum interincisal opening was greater in the group that submit to dextrose prolotherapy in comparison to the laser group (p<0.05). Conclusions:In temporomandibular disorders dextrose prolotherapy is more efficient in improving maximum interincisal opening in comparison to low level laser therapy. However, both treatments have the same effect in reducing pain at rest. KEY WORDS:Temporomandibular disorders, Low level laser therapy, Dextrose prolotherapy (96) Nermeen Hassanien, et al.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Dextrose Prolotherapy versus Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) for Management of Temporomandibular Joint Disorders (TMD): Clinical Randomized controlled Study

Hassanien

Kamel

Rashed

2020

Egyptian Dental Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1,2 Diagnosis is usually delayed due to the multifactorial etiology, and the lack of assessment devices and parameters criteria used for the classification and evaluation of TMD. 8,15,16,20,23 MT is another commonly used treatment based on joint manipulation and muscle mobilization techniques, which promote the release of inhibitory neurotransmitters, opioids, and non-opioid substances, improving movements, muscle relaxation, and providing pain relief. 10,26 Some studies performed MT in TMD patients and presented conflicting results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative effectiveness of photobiomodulation and manual therapy alone or combined in TMD patients: a randomized clinical trial

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effectiveness of photobiomodulation (PBM) and manual therapy (MT), alone or combined (CT), were evaluated in pain intensity, mandibular movements, psychosocial aspects, and anxiety symptoms of temporomandibular disorder (TMD) patients. Fifty-one TMD patients were randomly assigned to three groups: the PBM group (n = 18), which received PBM with 808 nm, 100 mW, 13.3 J/cm2, and 4 J per point; the MT group (n=16) for 21 minutes each session on masticatory muscles and temporomandibular joint TMJ; and the CT group (n = 17), applied during twelve sessions. Seven evaluations were performed in different moments using visual analogue scale (VAS), Research Diagnosis Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) Axis I and II, and Beck anxiety inventory (BAI). All groups demonstrated reductions in pain and improvement in jaw movements during treatment and at follow-up (< 0.001). The assessment of psychosocial aspects of TMD, comparing baseline and follow-up in all treatment groups, revealed that treatment did not promote modification in the intensity of chronic pain (p > 0.05). However, depression symptoms showed a reduction in PBM and CT groups (p≤0.05). All treatments promoted reduction in physical symptoms with and without pain and enhancement of jaw disabilities (p ≤ 0.05). MT promotes improvement in 5 functions, PBM in 2, and CT in 1 (p < 0.001). BAI analysis revealed that all treatments lead to a reduction in anxiety symptoms (p≤0.05). All protocols tested were able to promote pain relief, improve mandibular function, and reduce the negative psychosocial aspects and levels of anxiety in TMD patients. However, the combination of PBM and MT did not promote an increase in the effectiveness of both therapies alone.

show abstract

“…for tooth movement [8] and palatal expansion [9,10], tooth extraction [11,12], dental implants [13], Temporomandibular jaw disorders [14] and other oral surgeries [15], have recorded parameters like wavelength, power and energy dosage etc., without detailed explaining their choices. Most of the above mentioned studies did not mention which layer or depth is their target tissue.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Low Level Light Therapy (LLLT): Penetration and Photobiomodulation

Young¹

2017

J Oral Health Craniofac Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mester et al., stated the laser effects in a review of their studies of 15 various biological systems, they observed the stimulating effect of low energy (in terms of J/cm 2 ) laser and inhibiting effect of high energy laser and later reported the relationship of cumulative energy applied and the effects conforms to the Arndt-Schultz law. They concluded their experience with 875 healed cases and the results of their experiments had convinced them to recommend the use of lasers to stimulate wound healing [1].

show abstract

Management of Temporomandibular Disorders with Low Level Laser Therapy

Cited by 43 publications

References 20 publications

Dextrose Prolotherapy versus Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) for Management of Temporomandibular Joint Disorders (TMD): Clinical Randomized controlled Study

Dextrose Prolotherapy versus Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) for Management of Temporomandibular Joint Disorders (TMD): Clinical Randomized controlled Study

Comparative effectiveness of photobiomodulation and manual therapy alone or combined in TMD patients: a randomized clinical trial

Low Level Light Therapy (LLLT): Penetration and Photobiomodulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About