Mohl N D, McCall W D, Lund J P, Plesh O
Department of Oral Medicine, State University of New York, School of Dental Medicine, Buffalo.
J Prosthet Dent. 1990 Feb;63(2):198-201. doi: 10.1016/0022-3913(90)90106-m.
This three-part series of articles summarizes the uses of several devices or groups of devices intended for the diagnosis or treatment of temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and compares their claimed clinical usefulness with the present scientific evidence. Part I of this review defines TMD; discusses the principal criteria for evaluating published scientific clinical evidence such as reliability, validity, sensitivity, and specificity; gives a rationale for the clinical "gold standard" against which diagnostic and therapeutic devices must be compared; and evaluates the status of jaw tracking for the diagnosis of TMD. This review and evaluation led to the conclusion that, at the present time, the claim that jaw-tracking devices have a diagnostic value for TMD is not well supported by the scientific evidence.
本系列三篇文章总结了用于颞下颌关节紊乱病（TMD）诊断或治疗的几种设备或设备组的用途，并将它们声称的临床效用与现有科学证据进行了比较。本综述的第一部分定义了TMD；讨论了评估已发表的科学临床证据的主要标准，如可靠性、有效性、敏感性和特异性；给出了必须将诊断和治疗设备与之进行比较的临床“金标准”的基本原理；并评估了用于TMD诊断的下颌运动轨迹追踪的现状。这一综述和评估得出的结论是，目前，科学证据并不充分支持下颌运动轨迹追踪设备对TMD具有诊断价值这一说法。
