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.
BackgroundIn adolescents with non-pathological and pathological joint hypermobility, gait deviations have been associated with pain and fatigue. It remains unclear what distinguishes the non-pathological form of joint hypermobility (JH) from pathological forms (i.e. hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (hEDS) or hypermobility spectrum disorders (HSD). Our objective was to identify discriminative clinical characteristics and biomechanical gait features between adolescents with hEDS/HSD, JH, and healthy controls (HC).MethodsThirty-two adolescents were classified into three subgroups (hEDS/HSD=12, JH=5, HC=15). Clinical characteristics (e.g. pain intensity and surface, fatigue, functional disability) were inventoried.The gait pattern was assessed using a three-dimensional, eight-camera VICON MX1.3 motion capture system, operating at a sample rate of 100 Hz (VICON, Oxford, UK). Spatiotemporal parameters, joint angles (sagittal plane), joint work, joint impulse, ground reaction force and gait variability expressed as percentage using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) were assessed and analysed using multivariate analysis. Multivariate analysis data is expressed in mean differences(MD), standard error(SE) and P-values.ResultsThe hEDS/HSD-group had significantly higher fatigue score (+51.5 points, p = <0.001) and functional disability (+1.6, p < .001) than the HC-group. Pain intensity was significantly higher in the hEDS/HSD-group than the other subgroups (JH; +37 mm p = .004, HC; +38 mm, p = .001). The hEDS/HSD-group showed significantly more gait variability (JH; +7.2(2.0)% p = .003, HC; + 7.8(1.4)%, p = <0.001) and lower joint work (JH; −0.07(0.03)J/kg, p = .007, HC; − 0.06(0.03)J/kg, p = .013) than the other subgroups. The JH-group showed significantly increased ankle dorsiflexion during terminal stance (+5.0(1.5)degree, p = .001) compared to hEDS/HSD-group and knee flexion during loading response compared to HC-group (+5.7(1.8) degree, p = .011).SignificanceA distinctive difference in gait pattern between adolescents with non-pathological and pathological joint hypermobility is found in gait variability, rather than in the biomechanical features of gait. This suggests that a specific gait variability metric is more appropriate than biomechanical individual joint patterns for assessing gait in adolescents with hEDS/HSD.
PURPOSE: The patients diagnosed with Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome Hypermobility Type (EDS-HT) are characterized by pain, proprioceptive inacuity, muscle weakness, potentially leading to activity limitations. In EDS-HT, a direct relationship between muscle strength, proprioception and activity limitations has never been studied. The objective of the study was to establish the association between muscle strength and activity limitations and the impact of proprioception on this association in EDS-HT patients.METHODS: Twenty-four EDS-HT patients were compared with 24 controls. Activity limitations were quantified by Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), Six-Minute Walk test (6MWT) and 30-s chair-rise test (30CRT). Muscle strength was quantified by handheld dynamometry. Proprioception was quantified by movement detection paradigm. In analyses, the association between muscle strength and activity limitations was controlled for proprioception and confounders.RESULTS: Muscle strength was associated with 30CRT (r = 0.67, p = <0.001), 6MWT (r = 0.58, p = <0.001) and HAQ (r = 0.63, p= <0.001). Proprioception was associated with 30CRT (r = 0.55, p < 0.001), 6MWT (r = 0.40, p = <0.05) and HAQ (r = 0.46, p < 0.05). Muscle strength was found to be associated with activity limitations, however, proprioceptive inacuity confounded this association.CONCLUSIONS: Muscle strength is associated with activity limitations in EDS-HT patients. Joint proprioception is of influence on this association and should be considered in the development of new treatment strategies for patients with EDS-HT. Implications for rehabilitation Reducing activity limitations by enhancing muscle strength is frequently applied in the treatment of EDS-HT patients. Although evidence regarding treatment efficacy is scarce, the current paper confirms the rationality that muscle strength is an important factor in the occurrence of activity limitations in EDS-HT patients. Although muscle strength is the most dominant factor that is associated with activity limitations, this association is confounded by proprioception. In contrast to common belief proprioception was not directly associated with activity limitations but confounded this association. Controlling muscle strength on the bases of proprioceptive input may be more important for reducing activity limitations than just enhancing sheer muscle strength.
