Stress-related adaptive versus maladaptive coping and temporomandibular disorder pain.

Journal of orofacial pain Pub Date : 2012-01-01
Daniel R Reissmann, Mike T John, Oliver Schierz, Hartwig Seedorf, Stephan Doering
{"title":"Stress-related adaptive versus maladaptive coping and temporomandibular disorder pain.","authors":"Daniel R Reissmann,&nbsp;Mike T John,&nbsp;Oliver Schierz,&nbsp;Hartwig Seedorf,&nbsp;Stephan Doering","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To test whether patients with temporomandibular disorder (TMD) pain differ from subjects from the general population with regard to their stress-related coping styles.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Consecutive adult TMD patients (n = 70) and adult subjects of a regional general population sample (n = 868), examined according to the German version of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (RDC/TMD), were included in this study. The inclusion criterion for TMD patients was at least one pain-related diagnosis according to the RDC/ TMD, while general-population subjects were excluded if they had any pain-related TMD diagnosis. Coping styles were assessed using a common and well-accepted German 114-item stress-coping questionnaire (\"Stressverarbeitungsfragebogen\" SVF 114). The coping style-TMD pain relationship was investigated using logistic regression analyses adjusted for possible confounders (age, sex, level of education), as well as the influence of psychosocial measures (RDC/TMD Axis II). Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Study participants who used fewer adaptive coping styles (OR = 0.47, CI: 0.26-0.83) and more maladaptive coping styles (OR = 1.55, CI: 1.05-2.29) were at greater risk for TMD pain. After adjustment for sociodemographic confounders, the coping style-TMD pain relationship changed only slightly in magnitude. In an analysis adjusted for sociodemographic confounders and psychosocial RDC/TMD Axis II measures, adaptive coping styles were even more profoundly related to TMD pain (OR: 0.27, 95 CI: 0.09-0.83), but maladaptive coping styles were less related to TMD pain (OR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.51-2.72).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Differences in the applied stress-related coping styles of TMD patients and subjects without TMD may have implications for clinical decision making and choosing among treatment alternatives.</p>","PeriodicalId":16649,"journal":{"name":"Journal of orofacial pain","volume":"26 3","pages":"181-90"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of orofacial pain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: To test whether patients with temporomandibular disorder (TMD) pain differ from subjects from the general population with regard to their stress-related coping styles.

Methods: Consecutive adult TMD patients (n = 70) and adult subjects of a regional general population sample (n = 868), examined according to the German version of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (RDC/TMD), were included in this study. The inclusion criterion for TMD patients was at least one pain-related diagnosis according to the RDC/ TMD, while general-population subjects were excluded if they had any pain-related TMD diagnosis. Coping styles were assessed using a common and well-accepted German 114-item stress-coping questionnaire ("Stressverarbeitungsfragebogen" SVF 114). The coping style-TMD pain relationship was investigated using logistic regression analyses adjusted for possible confounders (age, sex, level of education), as well as the influence of psychosocial measures (RDC/TMD Axis II). Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

Results: Study participants who used fewer adaptive coping styles (OR = 0.47, CI: 0.26-0.83) and more maladaptive coping styles (OR = 1.55, CI: 1.05-2.29) were at greater risk for TMD pain. After adjustment for sociodemographic confounders, the coping style-TMD pain relationship changed only slightly in magnitude. In an analysis adjusted for sociodemographic confounders and psychosocial RDC/TMD Axis II measures, adaptive coping styles were even more profoundly related to TMD pain (OR: 0.27, 95 CI: 0.09-0.83), but maladaptive coping styles were less related to TMD pain (OR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.51-2.72).

Conclusion: Differences in the applied stress-related coping styles of TMD patients and subjects without TMD may have implications for clinical decision making and choosing among treatment alternatives.

压力相关的适应性与不适应应对和颞下颌紊乱疼痛。
目的:探讨颞下颌紊乱(TMD)疼痛患者的压力相关应对方式是否与一般人群不同。方法:根据德国版TMD研究诊断标准(RDC/TMD),纳入连续成人TMD患者(n = 70)和区域一般人群样本(n = 868)。TMD患者的入选标准是根据RDC/ TMD至少有一项与疼痛相关的诊断,而一般人群受试者如果有任何与疼痛相关的TMD诊断则被排除。采用德国通用的114项压力应对问卷(“Stressverarbeitungsfragebogen”SVF 114)对应对方式进行评估。采用logistic回归分析对可能的混杂因素(年龄、性别、教育水平)以及心理社会测量(RDC/TMD轴II)的影响进行校正,研究应对方式与TMD疼痛的关系。计算95%置信区间(CI)的优势比(OR)。结果:使用较少适应性应对方式(OR = 0.47, CI: 0.26-0.83)和较多不适应应对方式(OR = 1.55, CI: 1.05-2.29)的研究参与者患TMD疼痛的风险更高。在调整了社会人口学混杂因素后,应对方式与tmd疼痛的关系在大小上仅略有变化。在一项调整了社会人口学混杂因素和社会心理RDC/TMD轴II测量的分析中,适应性应对方式与TMD疼痛的关系更为深刻(OR: 0.27, 95 CI: 0.09-0.83),但适应性不良应对方式与TMD疼痛的关系较小(OR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.51-2.72)。结论:TMD患者与非TMD患者应用应激相关应对方式的差异可能对临床决策和治疗方案的选择有影响。
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
Journal of orofacial pain
Journal of orofacial pain 医学-牙科与口腔外科
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
×
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