Cited by 35Temporomandibular Joint DisordersClinical practice guidelines implementationHealthcare cost, quality, practices

Temporomandibular Disorders: Variation in Clinical Practice

Von Korff, Michael R., Howard, James A., Truelove, Edmond L., Sommers, Earl, Wagner, Edward H., Dworkin, Samuel·1988·Medical Care

Abstract

This research describes the extent of variability in diagnosis and treatment of temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and relates this variability to treatment outcomes. A health maintenance organization sequentially referred 145 patients with orofacial pain and dysfunction to two TMD clinics. The two clinics differed substantially in their use of tomography (applied to 28% vs. 64% of all patients), and varied moderately in diagnoses assigned to the patient groups. There was large variation in selection of treatments including appliances for bruxism (64% vs. 5%), mandibular repositioning (10% vs. 25%), and joint stabilization (3% vs. 30%); anti-inflammatory medications (44% vs. 19%) and analgesics (16% vs. 2%); and subsequent referral for dental or orthodontic treatment (1% vs. 42%). The differences in diagnostic and therapeutic practice that were found were not associated with important differences in patient-reported pain and dysfunction at 1-year follow-up. These data indicate the need for systematic approaches to identifying, evaluating, and modifying variation in health care practices for common presenting problems lacking reliable methods of evaluation and generally accepted clinical standards for choice of treatments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00005650-198803000-00007

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Observational studies have reported high variability in care for similar complaints in people living with chronic pain associated with temporomandibular disorders.

    “People living with chronic pain associated with TMD have several interventions from which to choose, and observational studies have reported high variability in care for similar complaints.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Von Korff, M. R., Howard, J. A., Truelove, E. L., Sommers, E., Wagner, E. H., & Dworkin, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Group Health Cooperative (US)
Corresponding author
Wagner, Edward H.
Venue
Medical Care
Published
1988-03
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
307-314
ISSN
0025-7079 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2016834646
Cited by
35
References
0
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
4.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Medical Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Complementary and Manual Therapy › Temporomandibular Joint Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Healthcare cost, quality, practices
Keywords
temporomandibular disorders, orofacial pain, treatment variation, diagnostic variability, health maintenance organizations, tomography, mandibular repositioning, joint stabilization, anti-inflammatory agents, analgesics, treatment outcomes
MeSH terms
Adult, Dental Health Services, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Health Maintenance Organizations, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Referral and Consultation, Research, Temporomandibular Joint Disorders, Time Factors, Washington

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review