Temporomandibular Disorders Digestive System Temporomandibular joint disorders
Conditions
Interventions
1. The patients were randomly divided into four groups:
1.1. Control group, with 9 subjects, receiving continuous dental treatment
1.2. Group laser, with 8 subjects, receiving dental treatment plus l
Sponsors
Lutheran University of Brazil (Universidade Luterana do Brasil) (Brazil)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
All
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: Temporomandibular joint dysfunction in patients with dental treatment
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: 1. Volunteers that did not suffer from pain in the masticatory muscles, 2. Volunteers who experienced changes in surface sensitivity 3. Volunteers who had had some type of physical therapy treatment for TMD
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| 1. All treatment groups showed an improvement in pain, according to the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), after physiotherapy. The laser (p=0.001) and laser + TENS groups were significantly better (p=0.005) than the control group. 2. According to the RDC/TMD questionnaire, there was an improvement in the laser (p=0.016) and laser + TENS (p=0.008) groups compared to the control group. 3. Surface electromyography (sEMG) showed improvements in all treatment groups when comparing pre-treatment and post-treatment, but only the laser + TENS group showed improvement in both the masseter and temporal muscles in relation to the control group. The range of joint motion significantly increased only for the mandible retraction movement in the laser group (p=0.003). | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| 1. There were no significant changes of the variables before and after treatment in the control group. Only the variable pain, measured by the VAS, increased from 2.0 points in the initial assessment to 4.44 points in the final assessment. 2. All treatment groups showed a significant improvement in pain, according to the VAS, after treatment. The laser + TENS group had a mean initial score of five, which was reduced to one in the final assessment. In relation to the control group, only the laser and laser + TENS groups had significantly lower values (in the laser group, p=0.001; in the laser + TENS group, p=0.005). 3. For the pain results obtained by the RDC/TMD axis II questionnaire, only the TENS and laser + TENS groups were different in relation to the control. Within the groups, there were improvements in pain of 17.5 points in the initial assessment to 13.83 points after treatment in the TENS group (p=0.016) and of 17.86 points to 13.43 points in the laser + TENS group (p=0.008). 4. In relation to the electromyographic activity of the masticatory muscles, the laser + TENS group showed significantly better mean values in relation to the control group in the activation of the left temporal muscle (p=0.023). For the right temporal muscle, the laser and TENS groups showed significant scores in relation to the control group (p=0.043 and p=0.05, respectively). For the right masseter muscle, the TENS and laser + TENS groups showed significantly greater electrical activity than the control group. Finally, the left masseter muscle showed similar results to the right masseter muscle, and activity was significantly greater in the TENS and laser + TENS groups. However, all treatment groups showed increased electrical activity in the masseter and temporal muscles in relation to the initial assessment. 5. The range of motion of the temporomandibular joint showed significant improvement during the mandibular retraction movement only in the laser group, increasing from 6. | — |
Countries
Brazil
Outcome results
None listed