The aim of this study was to investigate the reliability between different examiners when using the axis I of the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD). The hypothesis was that the standardized RDC/TMD examination protocol enables calibrated examiners to evaluate all examination items reliably. After calibration training by the RDC/TMD calibration team including the calibration of palpation pressure and the performance of the standardized examination protocol, four examiners, blinded to the patients' medical histories examined 24 subjects in a randomized sequence. One experienced examiner was the standard (hierarchical calibration). The recorded measurements strictly followed the RDC/TMD. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), bias and precision were calculated to estimate interrater reliability. Acceptable (0.75 > or = CC > 0.4) to excellent (ICC > 0.75) reliability was found for 20 of the 23 (87%) examinations. Only sub-retromandibular muscle palpation and joint sound vibration recordings on lateral excursion showed poor-results (ICC < or = 0.4). The RDC/TMD examination protocol enables calibrated examiners to perform most (87%) examination items with satisfactory reliability. Therefore multi-site studies based on the RDC/TMD examination protocol may become feasible, keeping in mind the unsatisfactory reliability of 13% of the items (clicking during laterotrusion to the ipsilateral side, palpation of the posterior and submandibular region).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schmitter et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: