The recently proposed shortened screening tools for temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and bruxism should enable a better assessment of these conditions by the general dentist.Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) are a group of conditions that cause pain and dysfunction of the masticatory muscles, the temporomandibular joints (TMJs) and associated structures. 1 The prevalence of TMD ranges from 10% to 15%, 2 and therefore can present a significant public health burden.Bruxism is repetitive jaw muscle activity characterized by the clenching or grinding of the teeth and/or bracing or thrusting of the mandible. 3It is widely accepted that bruxism is not a disorder, but rather a behavior that may be a risk factor for certain adverse clinical syndromes, such as excessive tooth wear, muscle pain, oral mucosa damage, and others. 3According to their circadian appearance, 2 forms of bruxism are acknowledged, including bruxism during wakefulness (awake bruxism (AB)), with an estimated prevalence rate of 20-31%, and bruxism during sleep (sleep bruxism (SB)), with an estimated prevalence rate of 5.5-12.5%. 4 There is some controversy about the relationship between TMD and bruxism. 5,6][9] The relatively high TMD and bruxism prevalence, as well as their common risk factors and comorbidities, raise the need for reliable and validated screening tools, and structured clinical examinations.Several such tools have been developed and used in recent decades. Temporomandibular disordersThe importance of incorporating the biopsychosocial model of chronic pain as an essential part of evaluating TMD patients was initially suggested in the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) published in 1992. 10The tool was used mostly for research purposes.In 2014, the RDC/TMD Axis II protocols were modified to create the Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) (http://rdc-tmdinternational.org). 11The purpose of introducing DC/TMD was Cite as
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Emodi‐Perlman et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: