Ö. Ekici, Ü. Dündar, M. Büyükbosna
Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Jan;80(1):70-80, 2022
Purpose: Many different treatment modalities have been tried in the treatment of temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders and different results have been reported. The aim of the study was to investigate and compare the effects of high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) therapy on the treatment of patients with TMJ disc displacement with reduction(DDWR).
Methods: Researchers conducted a prospective, single-blind, controlled clinical trial on patients with TMJ disc disease at a university's oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic. One hundred two patients were randomized into 3 groups (HILT, TENS and control group). The patients were evaluated in terms of maximum mouth opening (MMO), assisted MMO, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) (pain), and VAS (function). In addition, the disability status of the patients with the Jaw Functional Limitation Scale-20 (JFLS-20) and the quality-of-life with the Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) was evaluated.
Results: At the start of the trial, in terms of socio-demographic characteristics, no significant differences existed between the groups. Significant improvements were seen in pain (VAS), MMO, total JFLS-20 and total OHIP-14 scores in the HILT and TENS groups compared to the control group. At week 4, the VAS pain score decreased significantly in the HILT group compared to the TENS group (48 and 25%, respectively), while the MMO was significantly increased (24 and 10%, respectively). In addition, there was a significant improvement in both the total JFLS-20 score and the total OHIP-14 score at weeks 4 and 12 in the HILT group compared to the TENS group (P < .05).
Conclusion: It was observed that the healing effect of pulsed Nd: YAG laser therapy was significantly higher than TENS in patients with DDWR. Therefore, HILT should be a priority option over TENS therapy in patients with disc displacement.
L'accesso alla visualizzazione dei prodotti e al materiale informativo è riservato agli operatori del settore in ottemperanza alla legislazione vigente. ASA richiede di qualificarsi come operatore del settore per procedere con la navigazione.
Decreto Legislativo 24 febbraio 1997, n°46 Articolo 21
1. E' vietata la pubblicità verso il pubblico dei dispositivi che, secondo disposizioni adottate con decreto del Ministro della Sanità, possono essere venduti soltanto su prescrizione medica o essere impiegati eventualmente con l'assistenza di un medico o di altro professionista sanitario.
2. La pubblicità presso il pubblico dei dispositivi diversi da quelli di cui al comma 1 è soggetta ad autorizzazione del Ministero della Sanità. Sulle domande di autorizzazione esprime parere la Commissione di esperti prevista dall'articolo 6, comma 3, del decreto legislativo
30 dicembre 1992, n. 541, che a tal fine è integrata da un rappresentante del Dipartimento del Ministero della Sanità competente in materia di dispositivi medici e da uno del Ministero dell'Industria, del commercio e dell'artigianato.
Some of the contents of this website cannot be disclosed in the USA and its territories and possesions, for regulatory reasons. If you are a US resident, please click on the button here below and access ASA's distributor website for North America.