These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of device-supported sensorimotor training and splint intervention for myofascial temporomandibular disorder pain patients.
    Author: Giannakopoulos NN, Rauer AK, Hellmann D, Hugger S, Schmitter M, Hugger A.
    Journal: J Oral Rehabil; 2018 Sep; 45(9):669-676. PubMed ID: 29855069.
    Abstract:
    This study was to compare the short-term therapeutic efficacy of device-supported sensorimotor training with that of standard splint therapy for patients with myofascial temporomandibular disorder (TMD) pain over a treatment period of 3 months. We tested the hypothesis that both types of intervention are equally effective for pain reduction. In addition, the electromyographic (EMG) activity of the temporal and masseter muscles was recorded under conditions of force-controlled submaximum and maximum biting in intercuspation. Of consecutive patients seeking treatment for non-odontogenic oro-facial pain, 45 patients with myofascial TMD pain (graded chronic pain status, GCPS, I and II) were randomly assigned to 2 treatment groups (sensorimotor training and conventional splint treatment). Patients were evaluated 4 times (initial examination, 2, 6 and 12 weeks later) by use of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD). Electromyographic activity was recorded at the initial session and after 3 months. Ease-of-use of the treatment options was also evaluated. Significant (P < .0001) pain reduction (sensorimotor training 53%, splint therapy 40%) was achieved for both groups, with no significant differences (P > .05) between the groups. Force-controlled sub-maximum normalized electromyographic activity was significantly different between T0 and T3 for group A (sensorimotor training, P < .05) but was not significantly different for group B (splint, P > .05). For normalized maximum-biting EMG activity in intercuspation, however, a significant increase in EMG activity was observed for group A for the masseter and temporal muscles (P < .001) and for group B for the masseter muscle only (P < .001). Moreover, sensorimotor training was significantly (P < .05) less easy to use than the splint. The results of this study confirm the pain-reducing effect of sensorimotor training for patients with myofascial TMD pain (GCPS I and II). This innovative active treatment might be a promising option for TMD pain patients.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]