Refine
Document Type
- Article (9)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (9)
Keywords
- Alar ligaments (1)
- Hyperalgesie (1)
- Kiefergelenk (1)
- Kraniomandibuläre Dysfunktion (1)
- Physiotherapie (1)
- Stenose (1)
- Triggerpunkte (1)
- Zentrale Sensibilisierung (1)
- clinical tests (1)
- lumbal (1)
Institute
- Fakultät WiSo (9)
Zielsetzung
Bis dato konnte keine Studie eine Veränderung der Druckempfindlichkeit der myofaszialen Tender- oder Triggerpunkte (MTrP) bei Patienten mit kraniomandibulärer Dysfunktion (CMD) im extratrigeminalen Versorgungsgebiet nachweisen. Ziel dieser Studie war herauszufinden, ob die Druckempfindlichkeit der MTrP bei CMD-Patienten sowohl im trigeminalen als auch im extratrigeminalen Versorgungsgebiet im Vergleich zu gesunden Kontrollen erhöht ist. Außerdem sollte untersucht werden, inwieweit MTrP als Marker geeignet sind, eine Hyperalgesie bei CMD-Patienten zu diagnostizieren.
Probanden und Methoden
Für die Studie wurden 34 CMD-Patienten und 30 Probanden ohne CMD rekrutiert. In beiden Gruppen wurde die mechanische Schmerzschwelle an trigeminalen und extratrigeminalen MTrP gemessen und verglichen. Zusätzlich wurde mittels ROC-Kurve untersucht, welcher Marker am besten geeignet ist, CMD-Patienten als hyperalgetisch zu klassifizieren.
Ergebnis
Die Druckempfindlichkeit aller MTrP der trigeminalen und extratrigeminalen Körperregionen war in der CMD-Gruppe signifikant erhöht. Selbst nach Korrektur für multiples Testen blieben die meisten Effekte signifikant. Von den untersuchten MTrP war der M. trapezius am besten geeignet, CMD-Patienten als hyperalgetisch zu klassifizieren. Bei einer falsch-positiven Rate <5 % wurden ca. 42 % der CMD-Patienten als hyperalgetisch klassifiziert.
Schlussfolgerung
Die signifikanten Unterschiede der Druckempfindlichkeit der MTrP in trigeminalen und extratrigeminalen Körperregionen lassen auf eine Hyperalgesie bei CMD-Patienten schließen. Diese kann möglicherweise mit dem Marker des M. trapezius diagnostiziert werden. Hierzu sind jedoch weitere Studien notwendig, die u. a. geschlechts- und altersspezifische Referenzwerte ermitteln.
The primary objective of this study was to determine the structural and known-group validity as well as the inter-rater reliability of a test battery to evaluate the motor control of the craniofacial region. Seventy volunteers without TMD and 25 subjects with TMD (Axes I) per the DC/TMD were asked to execute a test battery consisting of eight tests. The tests were video-taped in the same sequence in a standardised manner. Two experienced physical therapists participated in this study as blinded assessors. We used exploratory factor analysis to identify the underlying component structure of the eight tests. Internal consistency (Cronbach's α), inter-rater reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient) and construct validity (ie, hypothesis testing-known-group validity) (receiver operating curves) were also explored for the test battery. The structural validity showed the presence of one factor underlying the construct of the test battery. The internal consistency was excellent (0.90) as well as the inter-rater reliability. All values of reliability were close to 0.9 or above indicating very high inter-rater reliability. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.93 for rater 1 and 0.94 for rater two, respectively, indicating excellent discrimination between subjects with TMD and healthy controls. The results of the present study support the psychometric properties of test battery to measure motor control of the craniofacial region when evaluated through videotaping. This test battery could be used to differentiate between healthy subjects and subjects with musculoskeletal impairments in the cervical and oro-facial regions. In addition, this test battery could be used to assess the effectiveness of management strategies in the craniofacial region.
Objectives
To develop a time-efficient motor control (MC) test battery while maximising diagnostic accuracy of both a two-level and three-level classification system for patients with non-specific low back pain (LBP).
Design
Case–control study.
Setting
Four private physiotherapy practices in northern Germany.
Participants
Consecutive males and females presenting to a physiotherapy clinic with non-specific LBP (n=65) were compared with 66 healthy-matched controls.
Primary outcome measures
Accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, Youden index, positive/negative likelihood ratio, area under the curve (AUC)) of a clinically driven consensus-based test battery including the ideal number of test items as well as threshold values and most accurate items.
Results
For both the two and three-level categorisation system, the ideal number of test items was 10. With increasing number of failed tests, the probability of having LBP increases. The overall discrimination potential for the two-level categorisation system of the test is good (AUC=0.85) with an optimal cut-off of three failed tests. The overall discrimination potential of the three-level categorisation system is fair (volume under the surface=0.52). The optimal cut-off for the 10-item test battery for categorisation into none, mild/moderate and severe MC impairment is three and six failed tests, respectively.
Conclusion
A 10-item test battery is recommended for both the two-level (impairment or not) and three-level (none, mild, moderate/severe) categorisation of patients with non-specific LBP.
Introduction
Tests to evaluate the integrity of the alar ligaments are important clinical tools for manual therapists, but there is limited research regarding their validity.
Method
A single blinded examiner assessed alar ligament integrity using the lateral shear test (LST), rotation stress test (RST) and side-bending stress test (SBST) on a sample of convenience comprising 7 subjects with MRI confirmed alar ligament lesions and 11 healthy people. Alar ligament lesions were identified using both supine and high-field strength upright MRI.
Results
The RST had a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 69.2%. The SBST and the LST both showed a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 76.9%. In cases where all three tests were positive, the specificity increased to 84.6%.
Discussion
Tests of manual examination of alar ligament integrity have some diagnostic utility; however, these findings require further corroboration in a larger sample.
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.
BACKGROUND: The Craniofacial Pain and Disability Inventory (CF-PDI) is a cross-culturally adapted instrument designed from a biopsychosocial perspective to measure pain, disability, and function in orofacial head and neck pain with shown psychometric properties; however, the German cross-cultural adaption is lacking.
OBJECTIVES: To carry out a transcultural translation of CF-PDI into German and assess its psychometric properties in patients with painful temporomandibular disorders (TMD) with respect to construct and clinical validity, internal consistency and reproducibility.
STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective, cross-sectional design.
SETTING: Patients (n = 398) were recruited from dental and physical therapy clinics in middle and south Germany.
METHODS: Structural validity was assessed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). We investigated know-group validity by means of the scale’s potential to discriminate between affected and unaffected subjects. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to estimate convergent validity. We tested test-retest reliability by the intraclass correlation coefficient and the Internal consistency by Cronbach’s alpha, or each dimension separately, and the total score. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to estimate convergent validity.
RESULTS: Two hundred forty-six heterogeneous chronic craniofacial pain patients and 152 patients without complaints were recruited from the middle and south of Germany. The German version CF-PDI-G presents 21 items, 4 factors, and adequate psychometric properties. The test-retest reliability and internal consistency of the CF-PDI-G were both excellent for the entire instrument and also for all sub-scales (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] > 0.90) except for the comorbidities and interference with work which was acceptable (ICC = 0.69). Standard error of the measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change values are sufficiently low. Assessment of clinical validity shows good potential of discrimination and classification into categories “no,” “mild,” “moderate,” and “severe.” The multiple linear regression model showed a strong association between neck disability index, Visual Analog Scale, and anamnestic questionnaire (supporting the scale’s convergent validity).
LIMITATIONS: Our sample has a higher prevalence of women and the sample was not recruited consecutively, which may lead to a biased estimation of psychometric properties.
CONCLUSIONS: The CF-PDI-G represents valid and reliable instrument to assess pain and disability in patients with orofacial pain and headache suitable for research and clinical practice.
Die Lumbale Spinalkanalstenose (LSS) bezeichnet eine symptomatische Verengung des Spinalkanals aufgrund einer kongenitalen Erkrankung (primäre LSS) oder eines degenerativen Prozesses (sekundäre LSS). Laut Schätzungen unterziehen sich 40 % aller von LSS betroffenen Patienten innerhalb der ersten 10 Jahre einem chirurgischen Eingriff. Ziel dieses Reviews ist, die Effektivität einer Rehabilitation, einschließlich individualisierter Physiotherapie, mit der herkömmlichen Versorgung nach einer Operation der LSS zu vergleichen.
Die Datenbanken CENTRAL, MEDLINE, DIMDI, PEDro und PubMed wurden systematisch nach randomisierten kontrollierten Studien durchsucht, die bis November 2018 durchgeführt wurden. Vier Studien wurden in den Review eingeschlossen. Die Gesamtqualität der Evidenz erwies sich dabei als moderat. Die Interventionen erfolgten unmittelbar während des Krankenhausaufenthalts oder innerhalb von 6–12 Wochen postoperativ und beinhalteten statt individualisierter Physiotherapie lediglich unspezifische Gruppentherapie. Die Kontrollgruppen erhielten herkömmliche Versorgung oder Empfehlungen zum postoperativen Verhalten. Die Analyse ergab keine Unterschiede zwischen den Gruppen in Bezug auf funktionellen Status und Rückenschmerzen kurz- und langfristig. Lediglich bezüglich Beinschmerzen zeigte sich eine signifikante Differenz zugunsten der Interventionsgruppe (SMD –0,22, 95 % KI –0,43 bis –0,01).
Nicht individuelle Physiotherapie zeigt demnach im Vergleich zur herkömmlichen Versorgung keine kurzfristigen Effekte hinsichtlich Funktion und Schmerz, jedoch einen kleinen klinisch relevanten und signifikanten langfristigen Effekt im Hinblick auf Beinschmerzen. Die geringe Anzahl an eingeschlossenen Studien und die moderate Qualität der Evidenz unterstreichen die dringende Notwendigkeit qualitativ hochwertiger Studien, die die Wirkung einer individualisierten, patientenzentrierten und evidenzbasierten Physiotherapie untersuchen.