Department of Oral Kinesiology, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam (ACTA), Research Institute MOVE, University of Amsterdam and VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Oral Rehabil. 2010 Oct;37(10):779-83. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02091.x. Epub 2010 Mar 29.
A large-scale, multi-site study has been performed to examine the reliability and validity of the research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (RDC/TMD) and to suggest revisions of the current RDC/TMD. During an International Association for Dental Research (IADR) Workshop in July 2008, preliminary results of this RDC/TMD Validation Project were presented. One of us was invited to be the critical discussant of the Workshop session in which the Study Group's papers were presented. This article is based on that contribution. One of our concerns relates to the possible circularity and bias, introduced by incorporating the RDC/TMD tests under investigation into the criterion examination. This may have had serious consequences for the outcomes of the validity study as well as for the proposed revisions of the diagnostic algorithms. In addition, a more detailed description of the process of replacing the RDC/TMD tests by other tests is needed. Further, to come to a revised RDC/TMD, it is crucial to know not only how the test outcomes are capable of discriminating between patients with TMD pain and pain-free subjects, as studied in this Validation Project, but also, more importantly, how they discriminate between patients with TMD pain and patients with oro-facial pain (OFP) complaints of non-TMD origin. We welcome the suggestion of an international expert panel to consider, deliberate, and reach consensus on a revised version of the RDC/TMD. Finally, we agree that the suggested expansions of the RDC/TMD taxonomy stress the need for the development of an RDC for OFP, which would include, as an integral part, the revised RDC/TMD.
一项大规模、多中心的研究旨在检验颞下颌关节紊乱研究诊断标准(RDC/TMD)的可靠性和有效性,并提出对当前 RDC/TMD 的修订建议。在 2008 年 7 月的国际牙科研究协会(IADR)研讨会上,介绍了该 RDC/TMD 验证项目的初步结果。我们中的一位受邀担任研讨会小组论文介绍环节的关键评论员。本文基于该贡献。我们的一个关注点涉及到将正在研究的 RDC/TMD 测试纳入标准检查可能带来的循环性和偏见。这可能对有效性研究的结果以及诊断算法的拟议修订产生严重影响。此外,需要更详细地描述用其他测试替代 RDC/TMD 测试的过程。此外,为了制定修订后的 RDC/TMD,不仅需要知道测试结果如何能够区分 TMD 疼痛患者和无痛患者,如本验证项目中所研究的那样,而且更重要的是,它们如何区分 TMD 疼痛患者和源自口腔颌面部疼痛(OFP)的非 TMD 疼痛患者。我们欢迎国际专家小组提出的建议,考虑、审议并就修订后的 RDC/TMD 达成共识。最后,我们同意 RDC/TMD 分类学的扩展建议强调了制定 OFP RDC 的必要性,其中将包括修订后的 RDC/TMD 作为一个组成部分。