Center for TMD & Orofacial Pain, Peking University School & Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, China.
Department of Oral & Maxillofacial Radiology, Peking University School & Hospital of Stomatology, Beijing, China.
Oral Dis. 2024 Oct;30(7):4495-4503. doi: 10.1111/odi.14877. Epub 2024 Jan 29.
This study aimed to enhance the quintessential "five temporomandibular disorder (TMD) symptoms" (5Ts) screener by incorporating frequency options and distinguishing between TMJ and muscle pain. The diagnostic accuracy along with cut-off points for the effective identification of TMDs was also established.
Participants, aged ≥18 years, were recruited from a university-based hospital. After completing surveys encompassing demographic data and the enhanced 5Ts (with frequency options [5Ts-F] and differentiation of TMJ/muscle pain [6Ts-F]), protocolized interviews and clinical examinations were performed following DC/TMD. The diagnostic accuracy and best cut-off points were determined with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUCs).
324 participants were recruited (mean age 30.0 ± 11.4 years). Among these, 86.4% had TMDs. 5Ts exhibited high diagnostic accuracy for detecting all TMDs (AUC = 0.92) with sensitivity/specificity values of 83.9%/88.6%. Both 5Ts-F and 6Ts-F had slightly better accuracy (AUCs = 0.95/0.96), comparable sensitivity, and superior specificity (97.7%) compared to 5Ts. The best cut-off points were 1.5 for 5Ts and 2.5 for 5Ts-F/6Ts-F.
Although all three TMD screeners presented high diagnostic accuracy, 5Ts-F/6Ts-F had notably improved specificity. 5Ts scores of >1.5 and 5Ts-F/6Ts-F scores of >2.5 are to be applied for screening the presence of TMDs.
本研究旨在通过增加频率选项并区分 TMJ 和肌肉疼痛,来改进经典的“五项颞下颌关节紊乱(TMD)症状(5Ts)”筛查工具。同时,还确定了诊断准确性以及有效识别 TMD 的切点。
从一所大学附属医院招募年龄≥18 岁的参与者。在完成包含人口统计学数据和增强的 5Ts(具有频率选项[5Ts-F]和 TMJ/肌肉疼痛的区分[6Ts-F])的调查后,根据 DC/TMD 进行了方案化的访谈和临床检查。使用受试者工作特征曲线下的面积(AUCs)来确定诊断准确性和最佳切点。
共招募了 324 名参与者(平均年龄 30.0±11.4 岁)。其中,86.4%患有 TMD。5Ts 对检测所有 TMD 的诊断准确性较高(AUC=0.92),其敏感性/特异性值分别为 83.9%/88.6%。5Ts-F 和 6Ts-F 的准确性略高(AUCs=0.95/0.96),敏感性相当,特异性更高(97.7%),优于 5Ts。5Ts 的最佳切点为 1.5,5Ts-F/6Ts-F 的最佳切点为 2.5。
虽然这三种 TMD 筛查工具都具有较高的诊断准确性,但 5Ts-F/6Ts-F 的特异性显著提高。5Ts 评分>1.5 和 5Ts-F/6Ts-F 评分>2.5 可用于筛查 TMD 的存在。