J Oral Facial Pain Headache. 2018;32(1):7-18. doi: 10.11607/ofph.1704.
The recently published Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) Axis I, which is recommended for use in clinical and research settings, has provided an update of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD). The authors of the DC/TMD based their publication on the results of a Validation Project (2001-2008) and consecutive workgroup sessions held between 2008 and 2013. The DC/TMD represents a major change in both content and procedures; nonetheless, earlier concerns and new insights have only partly been followed up when drafting the new recommendations. Moreover, the emphasis on immediate implementation in clinical and research settings is not in line with the provided external evidence on which the DC/TMD is based. This Focus Article describes these concerns with regard to several aspects of the DC/TMD: the additional classification categories; the high dependency on pressure-pain results from use of the recommended palpation technique; the TMD pain screening instrument; the test population characteristics; the utility of additional subgroups; the use of a reference standard; the dichotomy between pain and dysfunction; and the DC/TMD algorithms. Thus, although the DC/TMD represents an improvement over the RDC/TMD, its immediate implementation in research and clinical care does not yet appear to be adequately substantiated.
最近发布的《颞下颌关节紊乱诊断标准(DC/TMD)》第一轴,推荐用于临床和研究环境,更新了《颞下颌关节紊乱研究诊断标准(RDC/TMD)》。DC/TMD 的作者基于验证项目(2001-2008 年)和 2008 年至 2013 年期间举行的连续工作组会议的结果进行了发表。DC/TMD 在内容和程序上都有重大变化;尽管如此,在起草新建议时,对早期的关注和新的见解只是部分跟进。此外,在临床和研究环境中立即实施的强调与 DC/TMD 所依据的外部证据不符。本文重点介绍了 DC/TMD 的几个方面的这些问题:额外的分类类别;高度依赖推荐的触诊技术的压痛结果;TMD 疼痛筛查工具;测试人群特征;附加亚组的使用;参考标准的使用;疼痛和功能障碍之间的二分法;以及 DC/TMD 算法。因此,尽管 DC/TMD 比 RDC/TMD 有所改进,但它在研究和临床护理中的立即实施似乎尚未得到充分证实。