Psychological and Behavioral Factors Involved in Temporomandibular Myalgia and Migraine: Common but Differentiated Profiles

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background: Many studies have revealed high comorbidity and a clear association between temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and migraine. Furthermore, evidence points out that common psychological and behavioral factors might be related to the observed TMD and migraine association. However, this association and the underlying psychological factors are poorly understood. Objective: The main goal of this study was to describe the psychological and behavioral factors involved in TMD myalgia and migraine. Methods: A sample of 142 participants were recruited to form 4 groups: migraine patients (ICHD-III criteria), painful-TMD patients (Myalgia DC/TMD criteria), patients suffering from both pathologies according to the same criteria, and control patients. After a dental and neurological examination, the patients filled several psychological questionnaires validated for the Spanish population to assess anxiety (STAI), depression (DEP), stress coping (CRI), and somatic, anxiety, and depression symptoms (BSI-18). Results: The TMD myalgia patients, in general, showed a state of elevated anxiety, somatization, and reduced coping strategies, while the patients with migraine presented greater anxiety symptoms, depression (dysthymia trait and state), and somatization. Conclusions: According to the data of the present study, situational anxiety (transient emotional state), together with the lack of coping strategies, could be more associated with TMD myalgia, while anxiety, as a more stable and long-lasting emotional state, together with depression, might be more related to migraine. Further longitudinal studies are needed to unravel whether these differentiated profiles are a consequence or possible risk factors for migraine and TMD.

Related collections

Most cited references 54

Record: found
Abstract: not found
Article: not found

Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach.

Charles S. Carver, Michael F Scheier, Jagdish K. Weintraub (1989)

0 comments Cited 643 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) for Clinical and Research Applications: recommendations of the International RDC/TMD Consortium Network* and Orofacial Pain Special Interest Group†.

Eric D Schiffman, Richard Ohrbach, Edmond L Truelove … (2014)

The original Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) Axis I diagnostic algorithms have been demonstrated to be reliable. However, the Validation Project determined that the RDC/TMD Axis I validity was below the target sensitivity of ≥ 0.70 and specificity of ≥ 0.95. Consequently, these empirical results supported the development of revised RDC/TMD Axis I diagnostic algorithms that were subsequently demonstrated to be valid for the most common pain-related TMD and for one temporomandibular joint (TMJ) intra-articular disorder. The original RDC/TMD Axis II instruments were shown to be both reliable and valid. Working from these findings and revisions, two international consensus workshops were convened, from which recommendations were obtained for the finalization of new Axis I diagnostic algorithms and new Axis II instruments. Through a series of workshops and symposia, a panel of clinical and basic science pain experts modified the revised RDC/TMD Axis I algorithms by using comprehensive searches of published TMD diagnostic literature followed by review and consensus via a formal structured process. The panel's recommendations for further revision of the Axis I diagnostic algorithms were assessed for validity by using the Validation Project's data set, and for reliability by using newly collected data from the ongoing TMJ Impact Project-the follow-up study to the Validation Project. New Axis II instruments were identified through a comprehensive search of the literature providing valid instruments that, relative to the RDC/TMD, are shorter in length, are available in the public domain, and currently are being used in medical settings. The newly recommended Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD) Axis I protocol includes both a valid screener for detecting any pain-related TMD as well as valid diagnostic criteria for differentiating the most common pain-related TMD (sensitivity ≥ 0.86, specificity ≥ 0.98) and for one intra-articular disorder (sensitivity of 0.80 and specificity of 0.97). Diagnostic criteria for other common intra-articular disorders lack adequate validity for clinical diagnoses but can be used for screening purposes. Inter-examiner reliability for the clinical assessment associated with the validated DC/TMD criteria for pain-related TMD is excellent (kappa ≥ 0.85). Finally, a comprehensive classification system that includes both the common and less common TMD is also presented. The Axis II protocol retains selected original RDC/TMD screening instruments augmented with new instruments to assess jaw function as well as behavioral and additional psychosocial factors. The Axis II protocol is divided into screening and comprehensive self report instrument sets. The screening instruments' 41 questions assess pain intensity, pain-related disability, psychological distress, jaw functional limitations, and parafunctional behaviors, and a pain drawing is used to assess locations of pain. The comprehensive instruments, composed of 81 questions, assess in further detail jaw functional limitations and psychological distress as well as additional constructs of anxiety and presence of comorbid pain conditions. The recommended evidence-based new DC/TMD protocol is appropriate for use in both clinical and research settings. More comprehensive instruments augment short and simple screening instruments for Axis I and Axis II. These validated instruments allow for identification of patients with a range of simple to complex TMD presentations.

0 comments Cited 592 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

The Brief Symptom Inventory: an introductory report.

Leonard Derogatis, Nick Melisaratos (1983)

This is an introductory report for the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI), a brief psychological self-report symptom scale. The BSI was developed from its longer parent instrument, the SCL-90-R, and psychometric evaluation reveals it to be an acceptable short alternative to the complete scale. Both test--retest and internal consistency reliabilities are shown to be very good for the primary symptom dimensions of the BSI, and its correlations with the comparable dimensions of the SCL-90-R are quite high. In terms of validation, high convergence between BSI scales and like dimensions of the MMPI provide good evidence of convergent validity, and factor analytic studies of the internal structure of the scale contribute evidence of construct validity. Several criterion-oriented validity studies have also been completed with this instrument.