Twenty-year cohort study of health gain from orthodontic treatment: Temporomandibular disorders

Macfarlane, Tatiana V.; Kenealy, Pamela; Kingdon, HenryS.; Mohlin, Bengt; Pilley, J R; Richmond, Stephen; Shaw, William C.

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.10.017

Cited by 74 publications

(78 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the current survey 93.9% of the respondents disagreed with the statement "Orthodontic treatment can prevent the onset of TMD", against 77% of the respondents in the original survey. This topic has been extensively investigated, and despite the fact most of the publications support that Orthodontic treatment is not able to prevent TMD (23)(24)(25)(26)(27), some papers support the opposite (28,29). Most of the papers that stated that orthodontic treatment does not prevent TMD were published after 1990, and this might explain why the current survey shows a higher percentage of respondents who disagreed with the above-mentioned statement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 40%

Knowledge and Beliefs Regarding TMD: Has Anything Changed After 20 Years?

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Due to the variety of factors involved in TMDs it is not surprising to see a wide range of treatment modalities being suggested for TMD patients. However, one determinant of treatment for TMD that is often overlooked is the practitioner's knowledge and beliefs about the syndrome itself. Objectives: To evaluate changes in experts' knowledge and beliefs regarding Temporomandibular Disorders (TMD) since the administration of the first such survey by Le Resche, Truelove and Dworkin in 1993. Patients and Methods: A survey invitation was emailed to 62 dentists and 19 psychologists, all determined to be experts in the orofacial pain/TMD field. All dentists selected to be part of this survey were members of the American Academy of Orofacial Pain. Psychologists were selected based on their publications in this field. The Le Resche et al. questionnaire was used with the following adaptations: four new statements were inserted; one statement was removed; and a 6-point Likert agreement scale for each statement was used instead of the original 11-point scale. Reminder emails were sent at one week and one month to maximize the response rate. Changes in responses to each item from the original survey were assessed using z-test. Results: Thirty-four dentists but only three psychologists responded to the survey. Therefore only responses from dentists were used in the analysis. Overall there was a high level of agreement between the original sample and the current sample. Of the 34 original items there was very clear consensus on 24. There was consensus on two new items in the survey on the need for a tomogram and splint therapy. Conclusions: Twenty years after the original survey, the knowledge and beliefs regarding TMDs among experts in this field have not changed significantly.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 40%

Knowledge and Beliefs Regarding TMD: Has Anything Changed After 20 Years?

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regarding orthognatic surgery, Farella et al (2007), reported that bi-maxillary osteotomy did not initiate or aggravate signs and symptoms of TMD. A 20 year cohort longitudinal study by MacFariane et al (2009) investigated the relationship between orthodontic treatment and TMD concluded that orthodontic treatment neither causes nor prevents TMD and that participants with a history of orthodontic treatment did not have higher risk of new or persistent TMD . Henrikson and Nilnerl (2000), prospectively and longitudinally studied signs of TMD and occlusal changes in girls with Class II malocclusion receiving treatment, compared to subjects with untreated Class II malocclusion and with normal occlusion subjects.…”

Section: Temporomandibular Disorders and Orthodonticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occlusion, Orthodontic Treatment and Temporomandibular Disorders: Myths and Scientific Evidences

Winocur¹,

Emodi‐Perlman²

2012

Orthodontics - Basic Aspects and Clinical Considerations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A comparison is made between the groups of subjects, with respect to the risk factors that are believed to be associated with the development of the condition or event of interest. Cohort studies can be retrospective, prospective, or concurrent historical, among which only the time in which they are generated and when the data are collected, varies (e.g., from the present to the past in historical cohorts-Treatment of condylar fractures: A retrospective cohort study (Carneiro et al, 2008); and from the present into the future in the concurrent cohort: Twenty-year cohort study of health gain from orthodontic treatment: Temporomandibular disorders (Macfarlane et al, 2009)). …”

Section: Cohort Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is Published in Human Morphology?: Types of Designs and Levels of Evidence

Galdames

2010

Int. J. Morphol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY:Evidence-based medicine (EBM) employs the best available evidence in a particular time and context to solve specific clinical problems. This method of practicing medicine has been adopted by most of the disciplines involved in medical training; however, morphology appears to remain beyond this paradigm. The first step in evidence-based practice based on morphology is to recognize the types of studies being conducted with regard to morphology, followed by the assessment of the level of evidence that they provide, which is the purpose of this study. We designed a bibliometric study, in which journals in the Master Journal List of Thomson Reuters, selected using the keywords "Morphology" or "Anatomy," available between 2007 and 2008, with access to full text in electronic version, whose languages were English and Spanish, and which only considered studies on human morphology, were included. We analyzed a total of 790 articles, of which 93.1% were descriptive, 6.5% were analytical, and 0.4% were experimental design types. According to the stage of the study, most of the articles (94.8%) accounted for prevalence and differential diagnosis studies, concentrating on numerous designs such cross-section, which gave complex evidence (1c). The use of these methodologies for the systematic morphological knowledge allowed us to widen our research to generate clinically useful recommendations or merely a teaching approach based on the systematic morphological knowledge available.

show abstract

Twenty-year cohort study of health gain from orthodontic treatment: Temporomandibular disorders

Cited by 74 publications

References 31 publications

Knowledge and Beliefs Regarding TMD: Has Anything Changed After 20 Years?

Knowledge and Beliefs Regarding TMD: Has Anything Changed After 20 Years?

Occlusion, Orthodontic Treatment and Temporomandibular Disorders: Myths and Scientific Evidences

What is Published in Human Morphology?: Types of Designs and Levels of Evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About