Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache, 01/2001

Aims: To determine psychosocial predictors of patients' ratings of satisfaction with improvement and subjective pain relief. This study also examined the underlying components of patient satisfaction with improvement, as assessed at follow-up. Methods: The sample consisted of 107 chronic orofacial pain patients evaluated at a university-based orofacial pain clinic and referred for treatment with individualized treatment plans. Pain and psychosocial functioning were assessed with standard, reliable, validated selfreport instruments administered at the initial evaluation. Followup data were collected via a telephone-administered structured interview 8 months after the initial evaluation. Regression methodology was used to determine prediction models for satisfaction with improvement and subjective pain relief. Patient ratings of the quality of the caregiver communication were used as a control variable in all analyses. Results: Quality of caregiver communication predicted approximately 10 to 14% of the variance in outcomes in all models. Greater initial use of cognitive coping strategies and reduced depression predicted higher ratings of satisfaction with improvement and increased pain relief. When concurrent relationships among variables at the follow-up were examined, greater subjective pain relief since the evaluation, lower current pain, and higher ratings of overall mood were significant predictors of patient satisfaction with improvement. Conclusion: This study is one of the first to report that the use of certain cognitive coping strategies is associated with positive outcome for patients suffering from orofacial pain. These findings underscore the importance of individual differences on behavioral and psychosocial parameters in the prediction of patients' subjective evaluation of treatment outcome. Keywords: orofacial pain, patient satisfaction, treatment outcome, psychological adaptation, psychological distress

Aims: To address the following questions: (1) Which words are preferred by different groups of orofacial pain patients to describe their pain experience? (2) Is it possible, based on such descriptions, to obtain a clinical differential diagnosis in these patients? (3) Is there any relationship between the verbal description of pain and self-rated quality of life (QOL)? (4) Can a pattern of modulation of pain language by affective variables (diffusion model) be recognized in orofacial pain patients, as it has in other chronic pain patients? and (5) If so, what might be the clinical usefulness of assessing pain language in these patients? Methods: A total of 332 consecutive orofacial pain patients filled out an Italian Pain Questionnaire (the Italian analog of the McGill Pain Questionnaire) and were then divided into 6 diagnostic subgroups (sample 1) based on history and clinical findings. In a double-blind setting, the distribution of pain descriptors and indexes was statistically evaluated. From sample 1, a randomly selected sample of 121 patients (sample 2) also filled out a QOL categorical scale. The results of both tests in this sample were compared statistically. Results: Some significant differences among diagnostic subgroups were found for choice of descriptors and for pain intensity. When a patient's pain description was compared to the corresponding self-evaluation of QOL, a self-perceived worsening of QOL revealed a good correlation with an increase in the number of words chosen, pain intensity, and affective and sensory pain descriptors. A similar significant association was found between self-assessed anxiety and/or depression and the same items. Conclusion: Although trends in patients' choice of descriptors were evident, differential diagnosis based on only a pain questionnaire was not possible in the different groups of orofacial pain patients examined in this study. The present study suggests the presence of a phenomenon of diffusion in the language of those patients who were experiencing a worsening of their QOL as a result of pain and consequent psychologic distress. This observation can be of clinical usefulness by enhancing the sensitivity of the clinician to the suffering and affective distress experienced by the patient, and it also can be helpful in refining the therapeutic approach for each individual patient. Keywords: orofacial pain, pain measurement, quality of life, questionnaires, diffusion model

Aims: To evaluate the long-term effectiveness of a brief skills training program for the management of chronic facial muscle pain. This program of physical self-regulation (PSR) involved primarily training in breathing, postural relaxation, and proprioceptive re-education. Methods: Physical self-regulation training was presented by a dentist during two 50-minute sessions spaced at 3- week intervals and was compared to a standard dental care (SDC) program that included a flat-plane intraoral appliance and selfcare instructions provided by a dentist. Participants (n = 44) were initially evaluated by a dentist experienced in the diagnosis and management of orofacial pain and were determined to have myofascial pain (Type 1a and 1b diagnoses per the Research Diagnostic Criteria) prior to random assignment to either the PSR or SDC conditions. Posttreatment evaluations 6 weeks and 26 weeks after treatment had begun were conducted by a dentist who was not aware of which treatment the participants received. Results: Initial results indicated that pain severity and life interference from pain were reduced in both groups (P 0.001), while perception of control was increased (P 0.001), as was incisal opening without pain (P 0.05). At the 26-week follow-up, the PSR group reported less pain (P 0.04) and greater incisal opening, both with (P 0.04) and without (P 0.01) pain, than the SDC group. There were also significant decreases (P 0.05) in affective distress, somatization, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, tender point sensitivity, awareness of tooth contact, and sleep dysfunction for both groups over time. Conclusion: The findings support the use of PSR for the short- and long-term management of muscle pain in the facial region. These results are discussed in terms of the potential mechanisms by which self-regulation treatment strategies are effective for the management of these pain disorders. Keywords: pain, myofascial pain, self-regulation, removable orthodontic appliance, relaxation techniques

Aims: To investigate the prevalence of temporomandibular disorders (TMD), bruxism, and other oral habits among drug addicts compared to a normal, non-addicted, matched control population, and to assess the detrimental effect of long-term drug abuse on the parameters studied. Methods: Subjects included 55 drug-addicted patients (51 males and 4 females) randomly selected from longterm addicts using "hard" narcotics and attending a methadone maintenance center and a control group of 52 normal nonaddicted individuals (48 males and 4 females) matched to the addicts for age, gender, and socioeconomic status. A clinical examination and a questionnaire were used. One examiner determined that all questions were correctly understood and answered, and a second examiner performed the clinical examinations and was unaware of the results of the questionnaire. Results: The addicted group had a high prevalence of orofacial motor behavior (bruxing, clenching) as well as signs and symptoms of TMD (morning headache, joint noises, joint and masticatory muscle tenderness to palpation, and tooth wear) compared to the controls. Active (voluntary) jaw opening was significantly smaller, although within an acceptable range when compared to the controls. Conclusion: Long-term drug abuse detrimentally affects the stomatognathic system, as expressed in a high prevalence of oral motor behavior and signs and symptoms of TMD. Keywords: substance-abuse disorders, bruxism, oral motor parafunctions, temporomandibular disorders

Aims: First, to evaluate possible orofacial morphologic differences between sleep bruxers and non-bruxers, and second, to determine possible correlations between morphologic factors and striatal D2 receptor expression in persons with sleep-related oromotor activities. Methods: Twenty subjects were included in this study; half of them had polysomnographically confirmed oromotor values above the cutoff points for sleep bruxism. For all participants, 26 standard occlusal measures were recorded clinically and from dental study casts. In addition, 25 standard angular and linear measures were taken from standardized cephalometric films, and variables were derived to evaluate dental and skeletal relationships. Fourteen of the 20 participants had also participated in a previous study that included iodine-123-iodobenzamide (I-123-IBZM) and single-photon emission-computed tomography (SPECT). For them, the side-to-side difference in striatal D2 receptor binding was determined as the neurochemical outcome measure. Results: Following the classical Bonferroni adjustment for multiple testing, no morphologic differences were found between the sleep bruxers and the non-bruxers. In addition, none of the morphologic variables were significantly associated with the neuroimaging data. Conclusion: Taking into account the low power of this retrospective, exploratory study, the results suggest that the orofacial morphology of sleep bruxers does not differ from that of non-bruxers. In addition, morphologic factors are probably not involved in the asymmetry in striatal D2 receptor distribution that was previously observed in association with sleep bruxism. Keywords: sleep bruxism, iodine-123-iodobenzamide, single-photon emission-computed tomography, dental occlusion, cephalometry