4.3 Article

Psychosocial profiles of painful TMD patients

Journal

JOURNAL OF ORAL REHABILITATION
Volume 36, Issue 3, Pages 193-198

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL PUBLISHING, INC
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2008.01926.x

Keywords

temporomandibular disorders; psychosocial profiles; SCL-90; RDC; TMD; temporomandibular joint

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of the present investigation is to test the null hypothesis that the presence of psychopathology in patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD) is related to the presence of pain, independent of its location [(i.e. myofascial and/or temporomandibular joint (TMJ) pain]. Ninety-six (n = 96) patients affected by painful TMD underwent a clinical assessment in accordance with the research diagnostic criteria for TMD (RDC/TMD) guidelines and filled out the Symptoms Check List - Revised (SCL-90-R) instrument to investigate the presence of symptoms of psychopathology. Patients with myofascial pain, alone or combined with TMJ pain, endorsed the highest scores in all SCL-90-R scales and showed the highest percentage of abnormal values in the depression (DEP) and somatization (SOM) scales for the assessment of depressive and somatization symptoms. Nonetheless, anova revealed no significant differences between groups in any of the SCL-90-R scales, except than in the Positive Symptom Total Index (F = 3.463; P = 0.035), and the chi-squared test did not detect any significant differences between groups for the prevalence of abnormal scores in the DEP and SOM scales. The existence of a close association between pain and psychosocial disorders in TMD patients was supported by the present study. The null hypothesis is that no differences exist between patients with different painful TMD cannot be fully accepted for the presence of psychosocial disorders because of the trend evidencing higher SCL-90-R scores for myofascial pain patients, alone or combined with TMJ pain, with respect to TMJ pain alone.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available