Temporomandibular Joint Disorders, Arthralgia of TMJ
Conditions
Keywords
Auriculotemporal nerve block, Temporomandibular disorders, Physiotherapy, Anesthesia, Local
Brief summary
The retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the Auriculotemporal Nerve Block (ATNB) in achieving unrestricted mouth opening amount and in reducing the pain scores in those patients diagnosed with disc displacement with (DDWR) and without reduction (DDWOR) according to the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders, who could not benefit from noninvasive methods but did not want further invasion.
Detailed description
The records of 410 patients referred to the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery with TMD symptoms were reviewed to determine the treatment modalities used and their outcomes. The subjects were examined and diagnosed according to the Turkish translation version of The Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD-Axis 1 questionnaire and examination form). The pain intensity, maximal mouth opening (MMO) amounts, and self-reported outcome variables of twenty-two patients who underwent non-invasive therapies (occlusal stabilization splints, behavioral modifications, physical therapy, pharmacotherapy) but did not benefit from them and volunteered for the ATNB instead of invasive therapies (arthrocentesis, arthroscopy, and discectomy) were also evaluated. Prior to the ATNB, written informed consent was obtained from each participant. Also, each participant was warned about complications of the ATNB before the administration, such as hematoma at the injection site, positive aspiration, and temporary anesthesia of the facial nerve.
Interventions
PROCEDURElocal anaesthetic injection
The head and neck of the condyle were detected by palpating the pretragal area. Then, the needle was inserted anterior to the junction of the tragus and the lobule. After 0.5 ml the solution was subcutaneously infiltrated, the needle was protruded until it touched the neck of the condyle. Aspiration was performed to avoid intravenous injections, and the remaining solution was injected thereafter.
Sponsors
Tokat Gaziosmanpasa University
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
NONE
Intervention model description
Participants whose Temporomandibular disorders (TMD)-related complaints continued despite occlusal stabilization splint, NSAIDs and centrally acting muscle relaxant treatments were administered a total of 3 doses of Auriculotemporal Nerve Block (ATNB).
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Underwent non-invasive therapies (occlusal stabilization splints, behavioral modifications, physical therapy, pharmacotherapy) but did not benefit from them and volunteered for the ATNB instead of invasive therapies (arthrocentesis, arthroscopy, and discectomy).
Exclusion criteria
Patients with * Symptoms of the diseases possibly related to TMD (e.g., fibromyalgia, hypothyroidism, scleroderma, rheumatoid arthritis) * Orofacial disorders that might have been responsible for the TMD symptoms (e.g., neuralgia, migraine, myositis, trauma, neuropathic pain, infections) * Complications due to ATNB (e.g., temporary facial nerve palsy, hematoma, positive aspiration) * History of invasive therapies or TMJ surgeries
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Baseline Pain Intensity | At the initial visit before starting anesthetic administration. | Pain intensity was measured using a 10-point Visual Analog Scale (VAS), in which 0 referred to 'no pain', 5 referred to 'moderate pain,' and 10 referred to 'excruciating pain'. The patients were asked to mark their pain intensities on VAS scale. |
| Post-injection Pain Intensity | At six months follow-up visit | Pain intensity was measured using a 10-point Visual Analog Scale (VAS), in which 0 referred to 'no pain', 5 referred to 'moderate pain,' and 10 referred to 'excruciating pain'. The patients were asked to mark their pain intensities on VAS scale. |
| Change From Baseline Maximal Mouth Opening on Post-Injection Follow Up Visits | At the first week, fourth week and sixth month. | All patients' maximal mouth opening were measured and recorded as the distance between upper and lower right central incisors. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Satisfaction With The Applied Treatment | At the six-month follow-up visit | Patients were asked dichotomously to define the ATNB as successful/unsuccessful, according to their experience. The patients' responses were recorded individually. |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed