| Rezaie et al.52
|
30 patients
Group A: 7 men 8 women
Age: 27.65(4.04)
Pain: 4.2(0.78)
ROM: 48.27 (3.19)
Group B:
6 men
9 women
Age: 28.33(5.43)
Pain: 5.4(1.06)
ROM: 47.33(5.63)
|
Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD); VAS >3. |
GROUP A: intervention (manual therapy (mobilization of the TMJ and cervical spine) plus routine conservative treatment (TENS for 15 minutes, ultrasound for 5 minutes and gentle massage for 25 minutes in each session). |
GROUP B: control (routine conservative treatment). |
DC/TMD; Maximum pain intensity based on visual analog scale (VAS) greater than 3 for at least 3 months prior to the study.
Mandibular range of motion was measured with a calibrated caliper.
|
Ten treatment sessions for each group were carried out over 8 weeks by a physiotherapist. Patients received the first 4 sessions over 2 weeks. |
Comparisons between groups showed that, compared to the Control Group, patients in the Intervention Group (manual therapy on the TMJ and cervical spine, plus routine conservative treatment) experienced a significant reduction in pain, 1.67(0.62) and a significant increase in mandibular range of motion 53.20 (2.96) and cervical flexion range after the end of treatment and after the follow-up period.
GROUP B (routine conservative treatment): The results of the analysis within the control group showed that, compared with the baseline value, after the end of treatment and after follow-up, there was a significant reduction in the intensity of jaw pain, 4, 2 (0.78), and a slight increase in mandibular amplitude, 48.27(3.19). There was a statistically significant difference between the groups (p<0.001).
|
| Reynolds et al.53
|
50 patients
Group A:
5 men
20 women
Age: 32.2(11.3)
Pain: 3.7(1.5)
ROM: 37.8 (5.1)
Group B:
2 men
23 women
Age: 38.8(14.8)
Pain: 3.7(1.5)
ROM: 37.2 (6.7)
|
TMD screening tool (DC/TMD); NPS>2; Mandibular range < 50mm. |
GROUP A (AVBA): After receiving 2 minutes of suboccipital release, education, and a home exercise program, participants received upper cervical manipulation. |
GROUP B (sham): After receiving 2 minutes of suboccipital release, education, and a home exercise program, participants received sham manipulation. |
Numerical pain scale (END); Maximum mouth opening was measured with a disposable ruler.
Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia for TMD (TSK-TMD); Jaw Functional Limitation (JFLS); Global Classification of Change (GROC); Patient Acceptable Symptom Status (PASS).
|
4 sessions in 4 weeks. |
Both groups improved over time, however, differences between groups were not significant.
GROUP A: (AVBA): upper cervical manipulation and suboccipital release, education and home exercise program. JFLS, TSK-TMD and Perception of Change/Success - There was an immediate decrease in pain to 2.4 (2.2) as well as after 1 week 2.9 (1.5) and 4 weeks 1.69 (1.6) .and increase in immediate mandibular ROM to 40.88(7.2) as well as after 1 week 41.12 (10) and 4 weeks 45.84(8.3).
In GROUP B (Sham): Simulated Manipulation. - There was a decrease in immediate pain to 3.56(2.3) as well as after 1 week 3.15 (1.9) and 4 weeks 2.69(1.9). and an increase in immediate mandibular ROM to 38.68 (7.8) as well as after 1 week 39.52 (7.4) and 4 weeks 42.08(9).
|
| Calixter et al.54
|
61 patients
Group A:
30 women
Age: 26.1(5.7)
Pain: 7(2.0)
ROM:36.3 (8.8)
Group B:
31 women
Age: 26.3(4.6)
Pain: 7(2.5)
ROM: 33.1 (9.2)
|
TMD (RDC/TMD), myalgia with pain lasting 3 months. |
GROUP A: upper cervical mobilization, motor control exercises. |
GROUP B: no intervention and suboccipital release, education and exercise in the form of instruction and home exercise program. |
Pain intensity (VAS). |
10 sessions in 5-week follow-up. |
GROUP A (mobilization + exercises) showed a decrease in orofacial pain to 2.1(2.2) when compared to GROUP B (without intervention and suboccipital release, education and exercise in the form of instruction and home exercise program), there was no difference 3.1 (2.3) after 5 weeks of intervention, with a significant difference of 30% in pain intensity, p<0.05. |
| Garrigos-Pedro et al.51
|
45 patients
Group A:
20 women
3 men
Age: 46(9.1)
Pain: 73.5(13)
ROM: 32.87 (7.16)
Group B:
19 women
3 men
Age:48.2(11.3)
Pain:69.6(12.8)
ROM:31.41 (8.75)
|
Myofascial TMD (RDC/TMD). |
GROUP A: mobilization of the neck and TMJ, masticatory muscles and nervous tissue. |
GROUP B: cervical manual therapy, therapeutic and home exercises. |
Craniofacial Pain and Disability Inventory (CF-PDI), Headache Impact Test (HIT-6); pressure pain thresholds (PPTs)
Pain intensity (VAS), maximum opening (MMO) without pain (caliper).
|
6 sessions over 3-6 weeks. Each session lasted 30 minutes. |
GROUP A (mobilization in the cervical and TMJ region, masticatory muscles and nervous tissue) had a 30% decrease in pain intensity, reaching 59.65 (14.26) and an increase in ROM 37.22 (5.98).
GROUP B (cervical manual therapy, therapeutic and home exercises) had a decrease in pain intensity to 59.86 (14.26) and there was no difference in ROM 31.64 (8.48). There was a statistical difference between the groups p <0.001.
|
| Corum et al.56
|
60 patients
Group A:
20 women
Age: 27(6.3)
Neck Pain: 14
Headache: 14
Group B:
20 women
Age: 26(7.9)
Neck Pain: 16
Headache: 16
Group C:
20 women
Age:28.8(7.6)
Neck Pain: 14
Headache: 15
|
Diagnosis of myofascial TMD (RDC/TMD), with pain lasting 6 months. |
GROUP A: upper cervical manipulation + exercise. |
GROUP B: Simulated manipulation (sham) + exercise.
GROUP C: patient education.
|
Orofacial pain intensity (NPS) mandibular range of motion (AMM) (ruler in millimeters). |
1 month. |
GROUP A: (high cervical manipulation + exercise) obtained a decrease in pain intensity 1.6(1.5) as well as an increase in ROM 36.6(7.8).
There was a statistically significant difference when comparing pre- and post-treatment moments (p<0.001).
GROUP B (simulated manipulation (sham) + exercise) obtained a decrease in pain intensity 4.1(2.2) as well as an increase in ROM 36.8(7.8). There was no statistical difference between pre and post- treatment.
GROUP C (patient education) obtained an increase in pain intensity 4.6(2.7) as well as a decrease in ROM 32(8.8).
There was no statistical difference between pre- and post-treatment.
|
| Bortolazzo et al.55
|
10 patients
Group A:
5 women
Age: 25.8(6.8)
ROM: 27.6(8.56)
Group B:
5 women
Age: 25.8(6.8)
ROM: 40.6(11.76)
|
Diagnosis of myogenic TMD (RDC/TMD) Pain or fatigue in the masticatory muscles for a period between 1 and 5 years of pain. |
GROUP A: upper cervical manipulation. |
GROUP B: placebo maneuvers. |
Pain-free mandibular range of motion (MRM) (caliper). |
48 hours after the last intervention. |
GROUP A (upper cervical manipulation) showed an increase in mandibular range of movement, reaching 37.6(11.15), with a statistically significant p<0.05.
GROUP B (placebo), which presented a post-intervention ROM of 42.4(14.67), but it was not statistically significant.
|
| Tuner et al.57
|
40 patients
Group A:
15 women
5 men
Age: 34.8(12.4)
Pain: 17.5(21.5)
Group B:
16 women
4 men
Age: 37(14.6)
Pain: 23(23.6)
|
Stomatognathic examination. |
GROUP A: home exercises (education and postural exercises). |
GROUP B: Manual Therapy, education and home exercises (postural exercises and TMJ and soft tissue mobilization). |
Orofacial pain intensity (VAS). |
Each session lasted 30 minutes and 3 times a week. |
GROUP B: (Manual Therapy, education and home exercises) had a 30% decrease in pain intensity, reaching 0.5(2.2).
GROUP A (Home exercises (education and postural exercises) had a decrease in pain intensity, reaching 4.5(10). There was a statistical difference between the groups (p<0,001).
|
| Von Piekartz et al.58
|
43 patients
Age: 36(7.7)
27 women
16 men
Group A: 21 patients
Pain in C1:4
Pain in C2:29
Pain in C3:30
Group B:
22 patients
Pain in C1:6
Pain in C2:27
Pain in C3:32
|
Headache for more than 3 months, Neck Disability Index (NDI) score of more than 15%; 1 of 4 TMD signals (RDC/TMD); visual analogue scale (VAS). |
GROUP A: Orofacial manual therapy associated with cervical manual therapy, TMJ mobilization, masticatory muscle techniques and therapeutic exercises; the therapist can also add cervical treatment. |
GROUP B: (cervical manual therapy). |
Orofacial pain intensity - Visual Analogue Scale (VAS);
Cervical range of motion (cervical ROM).
|
Each session lasted 30 minutes and 3 times a week. |
GROUP A: (TMJ mobilization, masticatory muscle techniques and therapeutic exercises) had a 30% decrease in pain intensity, i.e. Pain in C1:0; Pain in C2:04 and Pain in C3:02.
GROUP B (cervical manual therapy) had a decrease in pain intensity, i.e. Pain in C1:1; Pain in C2:17 and Pain in C3:11.
The group that received orofacial treatment, in addition to general cervical manual therapy care, showed a significant reduction in all aspects of cervical involvement after the treatment period (p<0.05).
|