4.3 Article

Efficacy of stabilisation splint treatment on facial pain-1-year follow-up

Journal

JOURNAL OF ORAL REHABILITATION
Volume 42, Issue 6, Pages 439-446

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/joor.12275

Keywords

temporomandibular disorders; facial pain; treatment; stabilisation splint; RCT

Funding

  1. Academy of Finland
  2. Finnish Dental Society Apollonia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this randomised controlled trial was to assess the efficacy of stabilisation splint treatment on TMD-related facial pain during a 1-year follow-up. Eighty patients were randomly assigned to two groups: splint group (n=39) and control group (n=41). The patients in the splint group were treated with a stabilisation splint andreceived counselling and instructions for masticatory muscle exercises. The controls received only counselling and instructions for masticatory muscles exercises. The outcome variables were the change in the intensity of facial pain (as measured with visual analogue scale, VAS) as well as the patients' subjective estimate of treatment outcome. The differences in VAS changes between the groups were analysed using variance analysis and linear regression models. The VAS decreased in both groups, the difference between the groups being not statistically significant. The group status did not significantly associate with the decrease in VAS after adjustment for baseline VAS, gender, age, length of treatment and general health status. The only statistically significant predicting factor was the baseline VAS, which was also confirmed by the mixed-effect linear model. After 1-year follow-up, 276% of the patients in the splint group and 375% of the patients in the control group reported very good' treatment effects. The findings of this study did not show stabilisation splint treatment to be more effective in decreasing facial pain than masticatory muscle exercises and counselling alone in the treatment of TMD-related facial pain over a 1-year follow-up.

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