A scoping review of TMD systematic review abstracts: Comparison of search years 2004 and 2017
Rinchuse, Donald J.
Greene, Charles S
MetadataShow full item record
Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine how many TMD- related systematic reviews and meta-analyses had been published as of 2017 in comparison with those published as of 2004 and then to summarize the findings, based on an analysis of the abstracts from every paper. Material and Methods: A PUB MED search was initiated on May 1, 2017. There were two separate searches. The first search was for the topic, “Temporomandibular Disorders.” The second search was for the topic, “Temporomandibular Disorders and published in the Cochrane database.” The number and the topic category of reviews for 2017 were compared with those published as of 2004. Results: There were 120 relevant TMD systematic reviews found in search year 2017; 110 from the PUB MED and 10 from the Cochran Search. By comparison, there were only 8 TMD systematic reviews published as of 2004. The Abstracts for all 120 reviews indicated an increased role of genetics and psychosocial factors in the etiology of TMD. The future of TMD diagnoses appears to be toward various psychosocial and cellular tests, along with brain neuroimaging. The reviews on the topic of “treatment” supported conservative, non-invasive, reversible therapies, with a trend toward more targeted individual strategies. Conclusions: There were only 8 TMD systematic reviews published as of 2004 compared with 110 in 2017. Overall, the trend has been in the direction of better diagnostic procedures, more scientific concepts of etiology, and more conservative treatments for temporomandibular disorders. HIGHLIGHTS • There were 110 relevant TMD systematic reviews (relevant) reported in the general PUB MED listings in 2017; for the Cochrane database there were 10. In 2004 there were only 8 TMD systematic reviews. • Most of the 2017 listings dealt with TMD treatments; 58 for the general PUB MED listings and all 10 for the Cochrane listings. • The TMD systematic reviews emphasized support for conservative, non-invasive, and reversible forms of TMD treatments. • For orthodontists, the assertions that their treatments may cause, cure, or prevent TMDs have been clearly rebutted by the findings in a number of systematic reviews.
CitationRinchuse, D. J., & Greene, C. S. (2018). Scoping review of systematic review abstracts about temporomandibular disorders: Comparison of search years 2004 and 2017. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 154(1), 35-+. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.12.011
Date available in INDIGO2018-10-18T20:56:54Z
The following license files are associated with this item: