Background: Physical therapy is regarded an effective treatment for temporomandibular disorders (TMD). Patients with TMD often report concomitant headache. There is, however, no overview of the effect of physical therapy for TMD on concomitant headache complaints. Objectives: The aim of this study is to systematically evaluate the literature on the effectiveness of physical therapy on concomitant headache pain intensity in patients with TMD. Data sources: PubMed, Cochrane and PEDro were searched. Study eligibility criteria: Randomized or controlled clinical trials studying physical therapy interventions were included. Participants: Patients with TMD and headache. Appraisal: The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess risk of bias. Synthesis methods: Individual and pooled between-group effect sizes were calculated according to the standardized mean difference (SMD) and the quality of the evidence was rated using the GRADE approach. Results: and manual therapy on both orofacial region and cervical spine. There is a very low level of certainty that TMD-treatment is effective on headache pain intensity, downgraded by high risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision. Limitations: The methodological quality of most included articles was poor, and the interventions included were very different. Conclusions: Physical therapy interventions presented small effect on reducing headache pain intensity on subjects with TMD, with low level of certainty. More studies of higher methodological quality are needed so better conclusions could be taken.
DOCUMENT
Dear Editor,We would like to thank you for the opportunity to respond to the letter sent in by colleagues Castien & Scholten-Peeters, and thank them for their thorough reading of our paper. They have raised some issues that need to be addressed and will be responded to in this letter. We have also submitted proposed corrections of the paper to the editor to be handled at their discretion.
DOCUMENT
Aims: To assess the effectiveness of a variety of physical treatments in the management of tension-type headache (TTH) in children. Methods: This review is reported in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines and was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42014015290). Randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials that examined the effects of all treatments with a physical component in the management of TTH in children and compared these treatments to a placebo intervention, no intervention, or a controlled comparison intervention were included. The Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) criteria for bias assessment and the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria were used to assess the quality of the body of evidence. The outcome measures were pain, functioning, and quality of life. Only RCTs were included in the meta-analyses. Results: An initial search produced 10,464 published articles. Of these, 17 were relevant trials, including 1,815 participants. The overall GRADE rating of the included studies was moderate, and 11 of the 17 studies could be used in the meta-analyses. The effectiveness of physical treatments in terms of a reduction of pain of 50% or more showed a risk ratio (RR) of 2.37 (95% CI: 1.69 to 3.33). Relaxation training was the most evaluated intervention and proved to be significantly effective (RR: 3.00 [95% CI: 1.94 to 4.63]). In children having TTH combined with temporomandibular disorders, occlusal appliances were effective (RR: 2.58 [95% CI: 1.37 to 4.85]). Conclusion: This review supports the use of physical treatments to reduce pain in children with TTH.
LINK
SYNOPSIS: Vascular serious adverse events can occur after examining, manipulating, mobilizing, and prescribing exercise for the cervical spine. Patients presenting with neck pain and headache who develop a vascular serious adverse event during or after treatment may have vascular flow limitations that go unrecognized and are aggravated by treatment. Patients with neck pain and headache-the first nonischemic symptoms of arterial dissection-frequently access physical therapists as first-point providers, not all of whom have specialist training in orthopaedic manual physical therapy. All physical therapists, irrespective of their training, who are helping patients manage neck pain, headache, and/or facial symptoms must feel confident to identify potential vascular flow limitations of the neck prior to providing treatment. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(9):418-421. Epub 10 May 2021. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10408.
DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
![Corrigendum to "Effects of physical therapy for temporomandibular disorders on headache pain intensity: a systematic review" [Musculoskeletal science and practice 50 (2020) 102277]](https://publinova-harvester-content-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/thumbnails/files/previews/pdf/20250619195522480225.20250619175008103960.1_s2.0_S246878122100028X_main-thumbnail-400x300.png)
Background: Previous systematic reviews revealed poor reliability and validity for sacroiliac joint (SIJ) mobility tests. However, these reviews were published nearly 20 years ago and recent evidence has not yet been summarised. Objectives: To conduct an up-to-date systematic review to verify whether recommendations regarding the clinical use of SIJ mobility tests should be revised. Study design: Systematic review. Method: The literature was searched for relevant articles via 5 electronic databases. The review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. COSMIN checklists were used to appraise the methodological quality. Studies were included if they had at least fair methodology and reported clinimetric properties of SIJ mobility tests performed in adult patients with non-specific low back pain, pelvic (girdle) pain and/or SIJ pain. Only tests that can be performed in a clinical setting were considered. Results: Twelve relevant articles were identified, of which three were of sufficient methodological quality. These three studies evaluated the reliability of eight SIJ mobility tests and one test cluster. For the majority of individual tests, the intertester reliability showed slight to fair agreement. Although some tests and one test cluster had higher reliability, the confidence intervals around most reliability estimates were large. Furthermore, there were no validity studies of sufficient methodological quality. Conclusion: Considering the low and/or imprecise reliability estimates, the absence of high-quality diagnostic accuracy studies, and the uncertainty regarding the construct these tests aim to measure, this review supports the previous recommendations that the use of SIJ mobility tests in clinical practice is problematic.
LINK
Cervical spinal manipulation (CSM) and cervical mobilization are frequently used in patients with neck pain and headache. Pre-manipulative cervical instability and arterial integrity tests appear to be unreliable in identifying patients at risk at risk for adverse events. It would be valuable if patients at risk could be identified by specific characteristics during the preliminary screening.
DOCUMENT
Objective To develop and internally validate a prognostic model to predict chronic pain after a new episode of acute or subacute non-specific idiopathic, non-traumatic neck pain in patients presenting to physiotherapy primary care, emphasising modifiable biomedical, psychological and social factors. Design A prospective cohort study with a 6-month follow-up between January 2020 and March 2023. Setting 30 physiotherapy primary care practices. Participants Patients with a new presentation of non-specific idiopathic, non-traumatic neck pain, with a duration lasting no longer than 12 weeks from onset. Baseline measures Candidate prognostic variables collected from participants included age and sex, neck pain symptoms, work-related factors, general factors, psychological and behavioural factors and the remaining factors: therapeutic relation and healthcare provider attitude. Outcome measures Pain intensity at 6 weeks, 3 months and 6 months on a Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) after inclusion. An NPRS score of ≥3 at each time point was used to define chronic neck pain. Results 62 (10%) of the 603 participants developed chronic neck pain. The prognostic factors in the final model were sex, pain intensity, reported pain in different body regions, headache since and before the neck pain, posture during work, employment status, illness beliefs about pain identity and recovery, treatment beliefs, distress and self-efficacy. The model demonstrated an optimism-corrected area under the curve of 0.83 and a corrected R2 of 0.24. Calibration was deemed acceptable to good, as indicated by the calibration curve. The Hosmer–Lemeshow test yielded a p-value of 0.7167, indicating a good model fit. Conclusion This model has the potential to obtain a valid prognosis for developing chronic pain after a new episode of acute and subacute non-specific idiopathic, non-traumatic neck pain. It includes mostly potentially modifiable factors for physiotherapy practice. External validation of this model is recommended.
LINK
