Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
Has Fulltext
- no (4) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4)
Keywords
- Consensus (1)
- Examination (1)
- Greater occipital nerve (1)
- Headache (1)
- Manuelle Therapie (1)
- Migraine (1)
- Physical therapy (1)
- cervicogenic headache (1)
- chronische zervikogene Kopfschmerzen (1)
- mechanosensivity (1)
Institute
- Fakultät WiSo (4)
Objective
To identify assessment tools used to evaluate patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMD) considered to be clinically most useful by a panel of international experts in TMD physical therapy (PT).
Methods
A Delphi survey method administered to a panel of international experts in TMD PT was conducted over three rounds from October 2017 to June 2018. The initial contact was made by email. Participation was voluntary. An e-survey, according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES), was posted using SurveyMonkey for each round. Percentages of responses were analysed for each question from each round of the Delphi survey administrations.
Results
Twenty-three experts (completion rate: 23/25) completed all three rounds of the survey for three clinical test categories: 1) questionnaires, 2) pain screening tools and 3) physical examination tests. The following was the consensus-based decision regarding the identification of the clinically most useful assessments. (1) Four of 9 questionnaires were identified: Jaw Functional Limitation (JFL-8), Mandibular Function Impairment Questionnaire (MFIQ), Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia for Temporomandibular disorders (TSK/TMD) and the neck disability index (NDI). (2) Three of 8 identified pain screening tests: visual analog scale (VAS), numeric pain rating scale (NRS) and pain during mandibular movements. (3) Eight of 18 identified physical examination tests: physiological temporomandibular joint (TMJ) movements, trigger point (TrP) palpation of the masticatory muscles, TrP palpation away from the masticatory system, accessory movements, articular palpation, noise detection during movement, manual screening of the cervical spine and the Neck Flexor Muscle Endurance Test.
Conclusion
After three rounds in this Delphi survey, the results of the most used assessment tools by TMD PT experts were established. They proved to be founded on test construct, test psychometric properties (reliability/validity) and expert preference for test clusters. A concordance with the screening tools of the diagnostic criteria of TMD consortium was noted. Findings may be used to guide policymaking purposes and future diagnostic research.
An der 3-dreimonatigen Studie nahmen 43 Patienten (16 Männer) mit nach der International Classification of Diagnostic Criteria of Headaches (ICDH-ll) diagnostizierten zervikogenen Kopfschmerzen teil. Die Probanden wurden randomisiert in 2 Gruppen eingeteilt. Bei der Kontrollgruppe wurde nur die Zervikalregion manualtherapeutisch, bei der TMD-Gruppe zusätzlich die temporomandibuläre Region mit weiteren manuellen Therapietechniken behandelt, um einen zusätzlichen Einfluss auf die temporomandibulären Störungen auszuüben. Bei allen Patienten erfolgte eine Untersuchung vor der Behandlung, nach 6 Behandlungssitzungen und bei einem Follow-up nach 6 Monaten. Die Ergebniskriterien waren Intensität der Kopfschmerzen (gemessen anhand einer farbigen Analogskala), Neck Disability Index (niederländische Version), Conti Anamnestic Questionnaire, Abhorchen des Kiefergelenks mit dem Stethoskop, Graded Chronic Pain Status (niederländische Version), mandibuläre Deviation, Umfang der Mundöffnung und Druckschmerzschwelle der Kaumuskulatur.
Den Ergebnissen zufolge litten 44,1 % der Studienteilnehmer mit zervikogenen Kopfschmerzen an TMD. Die TMD-Gruppe wies nach der Behandlungsperiode eine signifikant verringerte Kopfschmerzintensität und eine verbesserte Nackenfunktion auf. Die Verbesserungen blieben während der behandlungsfreien Zeit bis zum Follow-up erhalten und traten bei der Kontrollgruppe nicht auf. Dieser Trend spiegelte sich auch in den Fragebögen und den klinischen temporomandibulären Zeichen wider. Die Beobachtungen lassen die Schlussfolgerung zu, dass die Behandlung der temporomandibulären Region bei Patienten mit zervikogenen Kopfschmerzen eine positive und langfristig anhaltende Wirkung hat.
Objectives
To investigate differences in pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and longitudinal mechanosensitivity of the greater occipital nerve (GON) between patients with side-dominant head and neck pain (SDHNP) and healthy controls. Evaluation of neural sensitivity is not a standard procedure in the physical examination of headache patients but may influence treatment decisions.
Methods
Two blinded investigators evaluated PPTs on two different locations bilaterally over the GON as well as the occipitalis longsitting-slump (OLSS) in subjects with SDHNP (n = 38)) and healthy controls (n = 38).
Results
Pressure pain sensitivity of the GON was lower at the occiput in patients compared to controls (p = 0.001). Differences in pressure sensitivity of the GON at the nucheal line, or between the dominant headache side and the non-dominant side were not found (p > 0.05). The OLSS showed significant higher pain intensity in SDHNP (p < 0.001). In comparison to the non-dominant side, the dominant side was significantly more sensitive (p = 0.004).
Discussion
Palpation of the GON at the occiput and the OLSS may be potentially relevant tests in SDHNP. One explanation for an increased bilateral sensitivity may be sensitization mechanisms. Future research should investigate the efficacy of neurodynamic techniques directed at the GON.
Background
A wide range of physical tests have been published for use in the assessment of musculoskeletal dysfunction in patients with headache. Which tests are used depends on a physiotherapist's clinical and scientific background as there is little guidance on the most clinically useful tests.
Objectives
To identify which physical examination tests international experts in physiotherapy consider the most clinically useful for the assessment of patients with headache.
Design/methods
Delphi survey with pre-specified procedures based on a systematic search of the literature for physical examination tests proposed for the assessment of musculoskeletal dysfunction in patients with headache.
Results
Seventeen experts completed all three rounds of the survey. Fifteen tests were included in round one with eleven additional tests suggested by the experts. Finally eleven physical examination tests were considered clinically useful: manual joint palpation, the cranio-cervical flexion test, the cervical flexion-rotation test, active range of cervical movement, head forward position, trigger point palpation, muscle tests of the shoulder girdle, passive physiological intervertebral movements, reproduction and resolution of headache symptoms, screening of the thoracic spine, and combined movement tests.
Conclusions
Eleven tests are suggested as a minimum standard for the physical examination of musculoskeletal dysfunctions in patients with headache.