Dina Taimeh, Richeal Ni Riordain, Stefano Fedele, Rachel Leeson
{"title":"Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Used in Temporomandibular Disorders: A Review of the Literature.","authors":"Dina Taimeh, Richeal Ni Riordain, Stefano Fedele, Rachel Leeson","doi":"10.11607/ofph.3264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To identify the range of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in TMD studies, summarize the available evidence for their psychometric properties, and provide guidance for the selection of such measures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search was conducted to retrieve articles published between 2009 and 2018 containing a patient-reported measure of the effects of TMDs. Three databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 517 articles containing at least one PROM were included in the review, and 57 additional studies were also located describing the psychometric properties of some tools in a TMD population. A total of 106 PROMs were identified and fell into the following categories: PROMs describing the severity of symptoms; PROMs describing psychologic status; and PROMs describing quality of life and general health. The most commonly used PROM was the visual analog scale. However, a wide range of verbal descriptors was employed. The Oral Health Impact Profile-14 and Beck Depression Inventory were the most commonly used PROMs describing the effect of TMDs on quality of life and psychologic status, respectively. Additionally, the Oral Health Impact Profile (various versions) and the Research Diagnostic Criteria Axis ll questionnaires were the instruments most repeatedly tested in a TMD population, and these instruments have undergone cross-cultural validation in several languages.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A wide range of PROMs have been used to describe the impact of TMDs on patients. Such variability may limit the ability of researchers and clinicians to evaluate the efficacy of different treatments and make meaningful comparisons.</p>","PeriodicalId":48800,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache","volume":"37 2","pages":"113-129"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10642334/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11607/ofph.3264","RegionNum":3,"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
Aims: To identify the range of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in TMD studies, summarize the available evidence for their psychometric properties, and provide guidance for the selection of such measures.
Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted to retrieve articles published between 2009 and 2018 containing a patient-reported measure of the effects of TMDs. Three databases were searched: MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science.
Results: A total of 517 articles containing at least one PROM were included in the review, and 57 additional studies were also located describing the psychometric properties of some tools in a TMD population. A total of 106 PROMs were identified and fell into the following categories: PROMs describing the severity of symptoms; PROMs describing psychologic status; and PROMs describing quality of life and general health. The most commonly used PROM was the visual analog scale. However, a wide range of verbal descriptors was employed. The Oral Health Impact Profile-14 and Beck Depression Inventory were the most commonly used PROMs describing the effect of TMDs on quality of life and psychologic status, respectively. Additionally, the Oral Health Impact Profile (various versions) and the Research Diagnostic Criteria Axis ll questionnaires were the instruments most repeatedly tested in a TMD population, and these instruments have undergone cross-cultural validation in several languages.
Conclusion: A wide range of PROMs have been used to describe the impact of TMDs on patients. Such variability may limit the ability of researchers and clinicians to evaluate the efficacy of different treatments and make meaningful comparisons.
目的:确定TMD研究中使用的患者报告结果测量(PROMs)的范围，总结其心理测量特性的现有证据，并为这些测量方法的选择提供指导。方法:对2009年至2018年间发表的包含患者报告的tmd影响测量方法的文章进行全面检索。检索了三个数据库:MEDLINE、Embase和Web of Science。结果:共有517篇包含至少一个胎膜早舞会的文章被纳入本综述，另外还有57篇研究描述了一些工具在TMD人群中的心理测量特性。共有106个问题被确定，并分为以下几类:问题描述症状的严重程度;描述心理状态的prom;以及描述生活质量和总体健康状况的prom。最常用的PROM是视觉模拟刻度。然而，使用了广泛的语言描述。口腔健康影响量表和贝克抑郁量表分别是最常用的描述tmd对生活质量和心理状态影响的PROMs量表。此外，口腔健康影响概况(各种版本)和研究诊断标准轴调查问卷是在TMD人群中重复测试最多的工具，这些工具已经在几种语言中进行了跨文化验证。结论:广泛的PROMs被用于描述tmd对患者的影响。这种可变性可能会限制研究人员和临床医生评估不同治疗方法的疗效并进行有意义的比较的能力。
期刊介绍：
Founded upon sound scientific principles, this journal continues to make important contributions that strongly influence the work of dental and medical professionals involved in treating oral and facial pain, including temporomandibular disorders, and headache. In addition to providing timely scientific research and clinical articles, the journal presents diagnostic techniques and treatment therapies for oral and facial pain, headache, mandibular dysfunction, and occlusion and covers pharmacology, physical therapy, surgery, and other pain-management methods.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
