Osteoarthritis and cartilage · 2017
Frequency of temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis and related symptoms in a hand osteoarthritis cohort.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Abrahamsson A K, Kristensen M, Arvidsson L Z, Kvien T K, Larheim T A, Haugen I K
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of osteoarthritis (OA) in the temporomandibular joints (TMJs) in hand OA patients is largely unknown. Our aims were to explore (1) The frequency of TMJ-related symptoms and clinical findings; (2) The TMJ OA frequency defined by cone beam computed tomography (CBCT); and (3) The relationship between TMJ-related symptoms/clinical findings and CBCT-defined TMJ OA, in a hand OA cohort.
METHODS: We calculated the frequencies of TMJ-related symptoms, clinical findings and diagnosis of TMJ OA by CBCT and clinical examination in 54 patients from the Oslo hand OA cohort (88% women, mean (range) age 71 (61-83) years). Participants with and without CBCT-defined TMJ OA were compared for differences in proportions (95% confidence interval (CI)) of symptoms and clinical findings. Sensitivity and specificity of the clinical TMJ OA diagnosis were calculated using CBCT as reference.
RESULTS: Self-reported symptoms and clinical findings were found in 24 (44%) and 50 (93%) individuals (93%), respectively, whereas 7 (13%) had sought healthcare. Individuals with CBCT-defined TMJ OA (n = 36, 67%) reported statistically significantly more pain at mouth opening (22%, 95% CI 4-40%), clicking (33%, 95% CI 14-52%) and crepitus (25%, 95% CI 4-46%). By clinical examination, only crepitus was more common in TMJ OA (33%, 95% CI 29-77%). Clinical diagnosis demonstrated low sensitivity (0.42) and high specificity (0.93).
CONCLUSIONS: CBCT-defined TMJ OA was common in hand OA patients, suggesting that TMJ OA may be part of generalized OA. Few had sought healthcare, despite high burden of TMJ-related symptoms/findings. Clinical examination underestimated TMJ OA frequency.
METHODS: We calculated the frequencies of TMJ-related symptoms, clinical findings and diagnosis of TMJ OA by CBCT and clinical examination in 54 patients from the Oslo hand OA cohort (88% women, mean (range) age 71 (61-83) years). Participants with and without CBCT-defined TMJ OA were compared for differences in proportions (95% confidence interval (CI)) of symptoms and clinical findings. Sensitivity and specificity of the clinical TMJ OA diagnosis were calculated using CBCT as reference.
RESULTS: Self-reported symptoms and clinical findings were found in 24 (44%) and 50 (93%) individuals (93%), respectively, whereas 7 (13%) had sought healthcare. Individuals with CBCT-defined TMJ OA (n = 36, 67%) reported statistically significantly more pain at mouth opening (22%, 95% CI 4-40%), clicking (33%, 95% CI 14-52%) and crepitus (25%, 95% CI 4-46%). By clinical examination, only crepitus was more common in TMJ OA (33%, 95% CI 29-77%). Clinical diagnosis demonstrated low sensitivity (0.42) and high specificity (0.93).
CONCLUSIONS: CBCT-defined TMJ OA was common in hand OA patients, suggesting that TMJ OA may be part of generalized OA. Few had sought healthcare, despite high burden of TMJ-related symptoms/findings. Clinical examination underestimated TMJ OA frequency.