The International journal of prosthodontics · 2026
INfORM/IADR Key Points for Good Clinical TMD Practice-A Critical Comment.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Türp Jens Christoph, Erbaşar Güzin Neda Hasanoğlu
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To critically evaluate the recently published INfORM/IADR consensus paper containing 10 key points for good clinical practice in the management of patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMDs).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: After perusing the text of the document, followed by intensive discussion, the 10 key points were carefully analyzed and annotated.
RESULTS: Two key points could be replaced by other (clinically relevant) statements. In addition to terminologically and semantically imprecise formulations, some verbal descriptions remain superficial and vague. While no distinction was made between acute and chronic TMDs, the INfORM/IADR author group differentiates between first-line and second-line therapeutic modalities without explaining the rationale for such a classification. Furthermore, no medication recommendations were made.
CONCLUSIONS: We anticipate that the INfORM/IADR publication will have a beneficial impact on the care of TMD patients. However, in our opinion, a reflection on some of the contents of the 10-point document seems justified to reduce the risk of misinterpretation of some statements, which could lead to inappropriate diagnostic and therapeutic measures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: After perusing the text of the document, followed by intensive discussion, the 10 key points were carefully analyzed and annotated.
RESULTS: Two key points could be replaced by other (clinically relevant) statements. In addition to terminologically and semantically imprecise formulations, some verbal descriptions remain superficial and vague. While no distinction was made between acute and chronic TMDs, the INfORM/IADR author group differentiates between first-line and second-line therapeutic modalities without explaining the rationale for such a classification. Furthermore, no medication recommendations were made.
CONCLUSIONS: We anticipate that the INfORM/IADR publication will have a beneficial impact on the care of TMD patients. However, in our opinion, a reflection on some of the contents of the 10-point document seems justified to reduce the risk of misinterpretation of some statements, which could lead to inappropriate diagnostic and therapeutic measures.