Randomized trial examines the relationship between oral behaviours and OHRQoL in TMD patients, highlighting significant psychological impacts.
BACKGROUND: Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) impair oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) through pain, dysfunction and psychosocial distress. Oral behaviours may exacerbate these impacts, but their associations across TMD subtypes remain underexplored. OBJECTIVES: This study examined oral behaviours across TMD subtypes and their relationships with psychological distress, alongside their four-dimensional impacts on OHRQoL. METHODS: A total of 989 first-visit TMD patients (mean age 29.7 years [SD 10.6]; 80.6% female) completed the Oral Behaviour Checklist, Patient Health Questionnaire-9, General Anxiety Disorder-7 and Oral Health Impact Profile for TMDs. Diagnoses followed DC/TMD protocol, classifying participants into intra-articular (IT: 28.9%), pain-related (PT: 38.4%) and combined (CT: 32.7%) TMD subtypes. Jaw overuse behaviour (JOB) was categorised as normal (NO: 18.6%), low (LO: 29.4%) or high (HO: 52.0%). Analyses included nonparametric tests, Spearman correlations and logistic regressions (α = 0.05). RESULTS: CT and PT reported more frequent waking-state nonfunctional oral activities (WN), higher psychological distress and poorer OHRQoL than IT. HO showed significantly greater impairment across all four OHRQoL dimensions: oral function, orofacial pain, orofacial appearance and psychosocial impact. Appearance and function consistently ranked highest among dimensions. Depression and anxiety were moderately correlated with psychosocial impact (rs = 0.51-0.65). High JOB was associated with younger age (OR 0.95), higher education (ORs 2.01-2.59) and depression (OR 1.07). Low OHRQoL was linked to female sex (OR 1.67), older age (OR 1.03), PT/CT subtypes (ORs 2.49-3.60), WN (OR 1.16) and anxiety (OR 1.29). CONCLUSIONS: Oral behaviours, especially WN, are significantly associated with psychological distress and multidimensional OHRQoL impairment in TMD patients, with distinct patterns across diagnostic subtypes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yap et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: