J Oral Facial Pain Headache. 2016 Spring;30(2):134-8. doi: 10.11607/ofph.1574.
To investigate the possible relationship between the orthodontic treatment of Class II malocclusion and the development of temporomandibular disorders (TMD).
A total of 40 patients was evaluated at four time points: the day before the start of treatment employing bilateral Class II elastics (baseline), as well as at 24 hours, 1 week, and 1 month after the start of treatment. The development of TMD pain complaints in the orofacial region and changes in the range of mouth opening were assessed at these times. Shapiro-Wilk, McNemar, and Friedman tests with 5% significance level were used to analyze the data.
The treatment produced pain of a transitory, moderate intensity, but there was no significant change from baseline after 1 month. There were no restrictions in the range of jaw motion or any evidence of limitations in mouth opening.
Orthodontic treatment with bilateral Class II elastics does not cause significant orofacial pain or undesirable changes in the range of mouth opening. Furthermore, this modality of orthodontic treatment was not responsible for inducing TMD.
研究安氏Ⅱ类错牙合畸形的正畸治疗与颞下颌关节紊乱病(TMD)发展之间的可能关系。
共评估了 40 名患者,在四个时间点进行:在开始使用双侧Ⅱ类橡皮圈治疗前一天(基线),以及开始治疗后 24 小时、1 周和 1 个月。在这些时间点评估了咀嚼肌和口颌系统区域 TMD 疼痛的发生和开口度的变化。采用 Shapiro-Wilk、McNemar 和 Friedman 检验,以 5%的显著性水平进行数据分析。
治疗引起了短暂的中度疼痛,但治疗 1 个月后与基线相比无显著变化。下颌运动范围没有受限,也没有开口受限的证据。
双侧Ⅱ类橡皮圈正畸治疗不会引起明显的咀嚼肌和口颌系统区域疼痛,也不会引起开口度的不良变化。此外,这种正畸治疗方式不会导致 TMD。