Gender variability in palpation performance for temporomandibular disorders with three different methods: An experimental study.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Hessamoddin Faghihian, Alicia Böthun, Birgitta Häggman-Henrikson, Maria Lalouni, Peter Svensson, Fredrik Hellström, Linus Andersson, Anna Lövgren
{"title":"Gender variability in palpation performance for temporomandibular disorders with three different methods: An experimental study.","authors":"Hessamoddin Faghihian, Alicia Böthun, Birgitta Häggman-Henrikson, Maria Lalouni, Peter Svensson, Fredrik Hellström, Linus Andersson, Anna Lövgren","doi":"10.1111/eos.13026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Gender differences in pain reporting and prevalence have been demonstrated. As gender of examiner also affects reporting of pain on palpation, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of examiner gender on palpation performance using three different palpation methods. Examiners of both genders were instructed on the correct technique for each palpation method by either a female or male instructor. The target was to achieve a pressure of 100 kPa, corresponding to the 1 kg of force for muscle palpation described in the diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (DC/TMD). All examiners performed traditional palpation with the index finger, palpation with a palpometer, and a novel bimanual palpation with visual feedback, in a randomized order. The examiner's gender, and its interaction with the gender of the instructor did not significantly affect magnitude, accuracy, or precision of the pressure applied. The method of palpation was the only factor that significantly impacted all metrics. The palpometer achieved the lowest palpation magnitude (mean pressure applied = 113.7  kPa, 95% CI: 109.8-117.6), the highest accuracy (absolute difference = 15.7  kPa, 95% CI: 12.3-19.1), and the highest precision (mean coefficient of variation = 6.8, 95% CI: 6.0-7.6), followed by bimanual palpation and traditional palpation. The results suggest that gender differences in pain reporting in patients are not likely to be a result of the technical aspects associated with the gender of the examiner. Instead, these differences may be attributed to other factors, such as sociocultural influences.</p>","PeriodicalId":11983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Oral Sciences","volume":" ","pages":"e13026"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Oral Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/eos.13026","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Gender differences in pain reporting and prevalence have been demonstrated. As gender of examiner also affects reporting of pain on palpation, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of examiner gender on palpation performance using three different palpation methods. Examiners of both genders were instructed on the correct technique for each palpation method by either a female or male instructor. The target was to achieve a pressure of 100 kPa, corresponding to the 1 kg of force for muscle palpation described in the diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (DC/TMD). All examiners performed traditional palpation with the index finger, palpation with a palpometer, and a novel bimanual palpation with visual feedback, in a randomized order. The examiner's gender, and its interaction with the gender of the instructor did not significantly affect magnitude, accuracy, or precision of the pressure applied. The method of palpation was the only factor that significantly impacted all metrics. The palpometer achieved the lowest palpation magnitude (mean pressure applied = 113.7  kPa, 95% CI: 109.8-117.6), the highest accuracy (absolute difference = 15.7  kPa, 95% CI: 12.3-19.1), and the highest precision (mean coefficient of variation = 6.8, 95% CI: 6.0-7.6), followed by bimanual palpation and traditional palpation. The results suggest that gender differences in pain reporting in patients are not likely to be a result of the technical aspects associated with the gender of the examiner. Instead, these differences may be attributed to other factors, such as sociocultural influences.

使用三种不同方法对颞下颌关节紊乱进行触诊时的性别差异:实验研究。
疼痛的报告和发生率存在性别差异。由于检查者的性别也会影响触诊时的疼痛报告,因此本研究旨在通过三种不同的触诊方法,评估检查者的性别对触诊表现的影响。在每种触诊方法中,由女性或男性指导员对男女考生进行正确技术指导。目标是达到 100 kPa 的压力,相当于颞下颌关节紊乱症(DC/TMD)诊断标准中规定的 1 kg 肌肉触诊力。所有检查者都按照随机顺序进行了传统的食指触诊、使用触诊计触诊和带有视觉反馈的新型双指法触诊。检查者的性别及其与指导者性别的交互作用对压力的大小、准确性和精确度没有显著影响。触诊方法是唯一对所有指标都有显著影响的因素。触诊器的触诊幅度最小(平均施压 = 113.7 kPa,95% CI:109.8-117.6),准确度最高(绝对差值 = 15.7 kPa,95% CI:12.3-19.1),精确度最高(平均变异系数 = 6.8,95% CI:6.0-7.6),其次是双指法触诊和传统触诊。结果表明,患者在疼痛报告方面的性别差异可能并不是与检查者性别相关的技术问题造成的。相反,这些差异可能归因于其他因素,如社会文化的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Journal of Oral Sciences
European Journal of Oral Sciences 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.30%
发文量
61
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Oral Sciences is an international journal which publishes original research papers within clinical dentistry, on all basic science aspects of structure, chemistry, developmental biology, physiology and pathology of relevant tissues, as well as on microbiology, biomaterials and the behavioural sciences as they relate to dentistry. In general, analytical studies are preferred to descriptive ones. Reviews, Short Communications and Letters to the Editor will also be considered for publication. The journal is published bimonthly.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信