Temporomandibular DisorderTMDNCT05240703
Stabilization Splint Treatment of TMD
A study testing Stabilization splint treatment in people with Temporomandibular Disorder and Facial Pain, run by University of Oulu.
Trial summary
The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to assess the efficacy of stabilization splint treatment on TMD-related facial pain and oral health-related quality of life during a one-year follow-up. Eighty TMD patients were randomly assigned to two groups: splint group (n=39) and control group (n=41). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 20 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Temporomandibular Disorder, Facial Pain
- What is being tested?
- Stabilization splint treatment
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 80 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 1 Mar 2008to 31 Aug 2010
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 20 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- clinically diagnosed TMD according to the RDC/TMD
- age > 20 years
Who cannot join
- Presence of any chronic diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis, that may affect the TMJ or the masticatory muscles
About this study
Official title: Efficacy of Stabilization Splint Treatment on Facial Pain - One-year Follow-up
The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to assess the efficacy of stabilization splint treatment on TMD-related facial pain and oral health-related quality of life during a one-year follow-up. Eighty TMD patients were randomly assigned to two groups: splint group (n=39) and control group (n=41). The patients in the splint group were treated with a stabilization splint and received counseling and instructions for masticatory muscle exercises. The controls received only counseling and instructions for masticatory muscles exercises.
The outcome variables were the intensity of facial pain (as measured with visual analogue scale, VAS), patients' subjective estimate of symptoms and treatment outcome, as well as Oral Heath Impact Profile (OHIP)-14. The differences in variables between the groups at each follow-up points (1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after baseline) were analyzed using regression models. Group status and presence of psychosocial symptoms were included as the explanatory factor and baseline VAS, gender, age, length of treatment and general health status as confounders.
Read the detailed description
DESIGN OF THE STUDY The study sample consisted originally of 80 patients (18 men, 62 women) who were referred to the Oral and Maxillofacial Department in Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland, for treatment of TMD-related facial pain. The patients were examined between March 2008 and August 2010. The inclusion criteria were the following: 1. clinically diagnosed TMD as defined by the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) (1), 2. minimum of 20 years of age and 3. lack of long-term illnesses (i.e. rheumatoid arthritis) that may affect TMJs or the masticatory muscles.
Using computer generated random numbers, the patients were randomly assigned to two groups: splint group and control group. Patients in the control group (n=41) were given counseling and guidance for masticatory muscle exercises. In addition to these, the patients in the splint group (n=39) were also treated with a stabilization splint.
DATA COLLECTION The patients had four follow-ups: at about 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and one year after the baseline evaluation. The same dentist specialized in stomatognathic physiology (KS) conducted all of the follow-up examinations, being unaware of the group status of the patients. At baseline the psychosocial screening (depression symptoms, non-specific physical symptoms, pain-related disability) was performed using RDC/TMD Axis II instruments. At baseline and at all the follow-ups the intensity of the facial pain was assessed using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The patients' subjective estimates of the effects of the treatment were evaluated with a questionnaire, using a scale from 1 to 4 (1= Very good effect, 2= Treatment has helped to some extent, 3= No difference / Cannot tell and 4= Symptoms worsened). The patients' general health status was also inquired by a questionnaire (on a scale of 1-5, 1=excellent, 2=very good, 3=good, 4=moderate, 5=poor). The patients filled in the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) questionnaire before treatment and at 3 months, 6 months and 1 year.
TREATMENT PROCEDURES The stabilization splints were made of heat-cured acrylic by the same dental technician. The occlusion of the splint was defined in the centric relation occlusion using wax (Astynax, Associated Dental Products Ltd, UK). The patients were instructed to use the splint every night during the course of the study.
All the patients in both groups were instructed to perform a standardized program for masticatory muscle exercises as described by Carlsson and Magnusson (1992). At the beginning of the training program, active mouth openings, laterotrusion and protrusion movements were performed. The mandible was held in the maximal positions for a few seconds on each movement. Thereafter, these movements were made towards resistance (using the patient's own fingers). After jaw exercises, the patients were suggested to open the jaw wide, stretching it with fingers a few times for 10 to 20 seconds. These movements were repeated 7 to 10 times per training session, and the sessions were performed 2-3 times per day. The patients received written instructions, and the movements were also demonstrated by the dentist before the treatment, and reprised if necessary. The instructions for masticatory muscle exercises were given by the same dentist (KS) at the first visit. At every examination the patients were reminded to use the splint and/or to perform the exercises at a regular basis.
The stabilization splint treatments were performed by two other dentists who were instructed in the treatment method.
ATTRITION All of the patients in the total sample were defined as belonging to the "intention-to-treat" (ITT) population. Thus, the ITT also included those who switched groups or those who in whichever group received other treatment than initially planned based on the group criteria. In the analysis, the number of days each patient had stayed in the assigned groups was taken into account. The patients who had stayed in their assigned groups for the whole follow-up period were defined as forming the "per-protocol" (PP) population.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Statistical significances of the differences in patients' estimate of the effects of the treatment between the groups were analyzed using chi-square test. Differences in means of the change in VAS between the groups were tested using ANOVA. VAS change was calculated by subtracting VAS at one-year follow-up from baseline VAS. The fluctuation of facial pain during the study (VAS) was demonstrated with a box-plot diagram. At first, linear regression analysis was used to analyze factors associated with change in VAS after one-year follow-up in both the ITT and PP populations. Group status was included as the explanatory factor and baseline VAS, gender, age, length of treatment and general health status were included as confounders. Linear mixed-effect regression model was used to analyse factors associated with change in OHIP severity during the 1-year follow-up, taking into account treatment time, age, gender and group status. The effect of depression and non-specific physical symptoms on the intensity of facial pain, as measured with visual analogue scale (VAS) was estimated with linear mixed models.
- Conditions
- Temporomandibular Disorder, Facial Pain
- Being tested
- Stabilization splint treatment
- Keywords
- temporomandibular disorders, TMD, facial pain, treatment, stabilization splint, clinical trial
- Medical subject headings
- Temporomandibular Joint Disorders, Facial Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Stabilization splint treatmentDevice
The stabilization splints were made of heat-cured acrylic by the same dental technician. The occlusion of the splint was defined in the centric relation occlusion using wax (Astynax, Associated Dental Products Ltd, UK). The patients were instructed to use the splint every night during the course of the study. The patients were instructed to perform a standardized program for masticatory muscle exercises. At the beginning of the training program, active mouth openings, laterotrusive movements and protrusive movements were performed. The mandible was held in the maximal positions for a few seconds on each movement. Thereafter, these movements were made towards resistance (using the patient's own fingers). After jaw exercises, the patients were suggested to open the jaw wide, stretching it with fingers a few times for 10 to 20 seconds. These movements were repeated 7 to 10 times per training session, and the sessions were performed 2-3 times per day.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Stabilization splint group | Experimental | The patients in the splint group were treated with a stabilization splint and received counseling and instructions for masticatory muscle exercises Receives: Device: Stabilization splint treatment |
| Control group | No intervention | The controls received only counseling and instructions for masticatory muscles exercises. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in facial pain intensity
The change of the intensity of the facial pain, assessed using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) on a 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as could be) rating
Measured: from baseline to 1-year follow-up
Subjective estimate on treatment outcome
The patients' subjective estimates of the effects of the treatment were evaluated with a questionnaire, using a scale from 1 to 4 (1= Very good effect, 2= Treatment has helped to some extent, 3= No difference / Cannot tell and 4= Symptoms worsened).
Measured: 1 month follow-up
Subjective estimate on treatment outcome
The patients' subjective estimates of the effects of the treatment were evaluated with a questionnaire, using a scale from 1 to 4 (1= Very good effect, 2= Treatment has helped to some extent, 3= No difference / Cannot tell and 4= Symptoms worsened).
Measured: 3 month follow-up
Subjective estimate on treatment outcome
The patients' subjective estimates of the effects of the treatment were evaluated with a questionnaire, using a scale from 1 to 4 (1= Very good effect, 2= Treatment has helped to some extent, 3= No difference / Cannot tell and 4= Symptoms worsened).
Measured: 6 month follow-up
Subjective estimate on treatment outcome
The patients' subjective estimates of the effects of the treatment were evaluated with a questionnaire, using a scale from 1 to 4 (1= Very good effect, 2= Treatment has helped to some extent, 3= No difference / Cannot tell and 4= Symptoms worsened).
Measured: 1 year follow-up
Subjective estimate on symptom severity
The subjective assessment of the severity of TMD symptoms after treatment was assessed by means of a scale on 1 to 5 (1= 'no symptoms'/ 'symptoms not significant', 2 = 'mild symptoms', 3 = 'moderate symptoms', 4 = 'severe symptoms', 5 = 'intolerable symptoms')
Measured: 1 month follow-up
Subjective estimate on symptom severity
The subjective assessment of the severity of TMD symptoms after treatment was assessed by means of a scale on 1 to 5 (1= 'no symptoms'/ 'symptoms not significant', 2 = 'mild symptoms', 3 = 'moderate symptoms', 4 = 'severe symptoms', 5 = 'intolerable symptoms')
Measured: 3 month follow-up
Subjective estimate on symptom severity
The subjective assessment of the severity of TMD symptoms after treatment was assessed by means of a scale on 1 to 5 (1= 'no symptoms'/ 'symptoms not significant', 2 = 'mild symptoms', 3 = 'moderate symptoms', 4 = 'severe symptoms', 5 = 'intolerable symptoms')
Measured: 6 month follow-up
Subjective estimate on symptom severity
The subjective assessment of the severity of TMD symptoms after treatment was assessed by means of a scale on 1 to 5 (1= 'no symptoms'/ 'symptoms not significant', 2 = 'mild symptoms', 3 = 'moderate symptoms', 4 = 'severe symptoms', 5 = 'intolerable symptoms')
Measured: 1 year follow-up
Change of Oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL)
Change of Oral health related quality of life was assessed using Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14, sum score from 0 to 56, the higher value indicating poorer OHRQoL)
Measured: from baseline to 1-year follow-up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted15 Feb 2022
- Study start1 Mar 2008
- Primary completion31 Aug 2010
- Study completion31 Aug 2010
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Temporomandibular DisorderStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 80 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Oulu
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Kirsi Sipilä, Professor, Principal investigator, Research Unit of Oral Health Sciences, University of Oulu, Finland
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05240703
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 29/2007
- Acronym
- TMD
- Status last verified
- Feb 2022
- First submitted
- 20 Jan 2022
- Last updated
- 15 Feb 2022
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Dworkin SF, LeResche L. Research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders: review, criteria, examinations and specifications, critique. J Craniomandib Disord. 1992 Fall;6(4):301-55. No abstract available.
PubMed 1298767Huttunen J, Qvintus V, Suominen AL, Sipila K. Role of psychosocial factors on treatment outcome of temporomandibular disorders. Acta Odontol Scand. 2019 Mar;77(2):119-125. doi: 10.1080/00016357.2018.1511057. Epub 2018 Sep 28.
PubMed 30264631Kokkola O, Suominen AL, Qvintus V, Myllykangas R, Lahti S, Tolvanen M, Sipila K. Efficacy of stabilisation splint treatment on the oral health-related quality of life-A randomised controlled one-year follow-up trial. J Oral Rehabil. 2018 May;45(5):355-362. doi: 10.1111/joor.12622.
PubMed 29512838Qvintus V, Suominen AL, Huttunen J, Raustia A, Ylostalo P, Sipila K. Efficacy of stabilisation splint treatment on facial pain - 1-year follow-up. J Oral Rehabil. 2015 Jun;42(6):439-46. doi: 10.1111/joor.12275. Epub 2015 Jan 17.
PubMed 25644634
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 15 Feb 2022. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Efficacy of Stabilization Splint Treatment on Facial Pain - One-year Follow-up
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05240703
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- TMD / 29/2007
- Conditions
- Temporomandibular Disorder, Facial Pain
- Keywords
- temporomandibular disorders, TMD, facial pain, treatment, stabilization splint, clinical trial
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 80 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of OuluUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Mar 2008 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Aug 2010 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Aug 2010 (actual)
- First posted
- 15 Feb 2022 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to assess the efficacy of stabilization splint treatment on TMD-related facial pain and oral health-related quality of life during a one-year follow-up. Eighty TMD patients were randomly assigned to two groups: splint group (n=39) and control group (n=41). The patients in the splint group were treated with a stabilization splint and received counseling and instructions for masticatory muscle exercises. The controls received only counseling and instructions for masticatory muscles exercises.
The outcome variables were the intensity of facial pain (as measured with visual analogue scale, VAS), patients' subjective estimate of symptoms and treatment outcome, as well as Oral Heath Impact Profile (OHIP)-14. The differences in variables between the groups at each follow-up points (1 month, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year after baseline) were analyzed using regression models. Group status and presence of psychosocial symptoms were included as the explanatory factor and baseline VAS, gender, age, length of treatment and general health status as confounders.
Detailed description
DESIGN OF THE STUDY The study sample consisted originally of 80 patients (18 men, 62 women) who were referred to the Oral and Maxillofacial Department in Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland, for treatment of TMD-related facial pain. The patients were examined between March 2008 and August 2010. The inclusion criteria were the following: 1. clinically diagnosed TMD as defined by the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) (1), 2. minimum of 20 years of age and 3. lack of long-term illnesses (i.e. rheumatoid arthritis) that may affect TMJs or the masticatory muscles.
Using computer generated random numbers, the patients were randomly assigned to two groups: splint group and control group. Patients in the control group (n=41) were given counseling and guidance for masticatory muscle exercises. In addition to these, the patients in the splint group (n=39) were also treated with a stabilization splint.
DATA COLLECTION The patients had four follow-ups: at about 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and one year after the baseline evaluation. The same dentist specialized in stomatognathic physiology (KS) conducted all of the follow-up examinations, being unaware of the group status of the patients. At baseline the psychosocial screening (depression symptoms, non-specific physical symptoms, pain-related disability) was performed using RDC/TMD Axis II instruments. At baseline and at all the follow-ups the intensity of the facial pain was assessed using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The patients' subjective estimates of the effects of the treatment were evaluated with a questionnaire, using a scale from 1 to 4 (1= Very good effect, 2= Treatment has helped to some extent, 3= No difference / Cannot tell and 4= Symptoms worsened). The patients' general health status was also inquired by a questionnaire (on a scale of 1-5, 1=excellent, 2=very good, 3=good, 4=moderate, 5=poor). The patients filled in the Oral Health Impact Profile-14 (OHIP-14) questionnaire before treatment and at 3 months, 6 months and 1 year.
TREATMENT PROCEDURES The stabilization splints were made of heat-cured acrylic by the same dental technician. The occlusion of the splint was defined in the centric relation occlusion using wax (Astynax, Associated Dental Products Ltd, UK). The patients were instructed to use the splint every night during the course of the study.
All the patients in both groups were instructed to perform a standardized program for masticatory muscle exercises as described by Carlsson and Magnusson (1992). At the beginning of the training program, active mouth openings, laterotrusion and protrusion movements were performed. The mandible was held in the maximal positions for a few seconds on each movement. Thereafter, these movements were made towards resistance (using the patient's own fingers). After jaw exercises, the patients were suggested to open the jaw wide, stretching it with fingers a few times for 10 to 20 seconds. These movements were repeated 7 to 10 times per training session, and the sessions were performed 2-3 times per day. The patients received written instructions, and the movements were also demonstrated by the dentist before the treatment, and reprised if necessary. The instructions for masticatory muscle exercises were given by the same dentist (KS) at the first visit. At every examination the patients were reminded to use the splint and/or to perform the exercises at a regular basis.
The stabilization splint treatments were performed by two other dentists who were instructed in the treatment method.
ATTRITION All of the patients in the total sample were defined as belonging to the "intention-to-treat" (ITT) population. Thus, the ITT also included those who switched groups or those who in whichever group received other treatment than initially planned based on the group criteria. In the analysis, the number of days each patient had stayed in the assigned groups was taken into account. The patients who had stayed in their assigned groups for the whole follow-up period were defined as forming the "per-protocol" (PP) population.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Statistical significances of the differences in patients' estimate of the effects of the treatment between the groups were analyzed using chi-square test. Differences in means of the change in VAS between the groups were tested using ANOVA. VAS change was calculated by subtracting VAS at one-year follow-up from baseline VAS. The fluctuation of facial pain during the study (VAS) was demonstrated with a box-plot diagram. At first, linear regression analysis was used to analyze factors associated with change in VAS after one-year follow-up in both the ITT and PP populations. Group status was included as the explanatory factor and baseline VAS, gender, age, length of treatment and general health status were included as confounders. Linear mixed-effect regression model was used to analyse factors associated with change in OHIP severity during the 1-year follow-up, taking into account treatment time, age, gender and group status. The effect of depression and non-specific physical symptoms on the intensity of facial pain, as measured with visual analogue scale (VAS) was estimated with linear mixed models.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Stabilization splint group | Experimental | Device: Stabilization splint treatmentThe patients in the splint group were treated with a stabilization splint and received counseling and instructions for masticatory muscle exercises |
| Control group | No intervention | –The controls received only counseling and instructions for masticatory muscles exercises. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 20 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- clinically diagnosed TMD according to the RDC/TMD
- age > 20 years
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Presence of any chronic diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis, that may affect the TMJ or the masticatory muscles
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Stabilization splint treatmentThe stabilization splints were made of heat-cured acrylic by the same dental technician. The occlusion of the splint was defined in the centric relation occlusion using wax (Astynax, Associated Dental Products Ltd, UK). The patients were instructed to use the splint every night during the course of the study. The patients were instructed to perform a standardized program for masticatory muscle exercises. At the beginning of the training program, active mouth openings, laterotrusive movements and protrusive movements were performed. The mandible was held in the maximal positions for a few seconds on each movement. Thereafter, these movements were made towards resistance (using the patient's own fingers). After jaw exercises, the patients were suggested to open the jaw wide, stretching it with fingers a few times for 10 to 20 seconds. These movements were repeated 7 to 10 times per training session, and the sessions were performed 2-3 times per day. | Device | Stabilization splint group |
Primary outcome
Change in facial pain intensity
Time frame: from baseline to 1-year follow-up
The change of the intensity of the facial pain, assessed using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) on a 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as could be) rating
Subjective estimate on treatment outcome
Time frame: 1 month follow-up
The patients' subjective estimates of the effects of the treatment were evaluated with a questionnaire, using a scale from 1 to 4 (1= Very good effect, 2= Treatment has helped to some extent, 3= No difference / Cannot tell and 4= Symptoms worsened).
Subjective estimate on treatment outcome
Time frame: 3 month follow-up
The patients' subjective estimates of the effects of the treatment were evaluated with a questionnaire, using a scale from 1 to 4 (1= Very good effect, 2= Treatment has helped to some extent, 3= No difference / Cannot tell and 4= Symptoms worsened).
Subjective estimate on treatment outcome
Time frame: 6 month follow-up
The patients' subjective estimates of the effects of the treatment were evaluated with a questionnaire, using a scale from 1 to 4 (1= Very good effect, 2= Treatment has helped to some extent, 3= No difference / Cannot tell and 4= Symptoms worsened).
Subjective estimate on treatment outcome
Time frame: 1 year follow-up
The patients' subjective estimates of the effects of the treatment were evaluated with a questionnaire, using a scale from 1 to 4 (1= Very good effect, 2= Treatment has helped to some extent, 3= No difference / Cannot tell and 4= Symptoms worsened).
Subjective estimate on symptom severity
Time frame: 1 month follow-up
The subjective assessment of the severity of TMD symptoms after treatment was assessed by means of a scale on 1 to 5 (1= 'no symptoms'/ 'symptoms not significant', 2 = 'mild symptoms', 3 = 'moderate symptoms', 4 = 'severe symptoms', 5 = 'intolerable symptoms')
Subjective estimate on symptom severity
Time frame: 3 month follow-up
The subjective assessment of the severity of TMD symptoms after treatment was assessed by means of a scale on 1 to 5 (1= 'no symptoms'/ 'symptoms not significant', 2 = 'mild symptoms', 3 = 'moderate symptoms', 4 = 'severe symptoms', 5 = 'intolerable symptoms')
Subjective estimate on symptom severity
Time frame: 6 month follow-up
The subjective assessment of the severity of TMD symptoms after treatment was assessed by means of a scale on 1 to 5 (1= 'no symptoms'/ 'symptoms not significant', 2 = 'mild symptoms', 3 = 'moderate symptoms', 4 = 'severe symptoms', 5 = 'intolerable symptoms')
Subjective estimate on symptom severity
Time frame: 1 year follow-up
The subjective assessment of the severity of TMD symptoms after treatment was assessed by means of a scale on 1 to 5 (1= 'no symptoms'/ 'symptoms not significant', 2 = 'mild symptoms', 3 = 'moderate symptoms', 4 = 'severe symptoms', 5 = 'intolerable symptoms')
Change of Oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL)
Time frame: from baseline to 1-year follow-up
Change of Oral health related quality of life was assessed using Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14, sum score from 0 to 56, the higher value indicating poorer OHRQoL)
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 15 Feb 2022.
- Background: PubMed 1298767Dworkin SF, LeResche L. Research diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders: review, criteria, examinations and specifications, critique. J Craniomandib Disord. 1992 Fall;6(4):301-55. No abstract available.
- Results publication: PubMed 30264631Huttunen J, Qvintus V, Suominen AL, Sipila K. Role of psychosocial factors on treatment outcome of temporomandibular disorders. Acta Odontol Scand. 2019 Mar;77(2):119-125. doi: 10.1080/00016357.2018.1511057. Epub 2018 Sep 28.
- Results publication: PubMed 29512838Kokkola O, Suominen AL, Qvintus V, Myllykangas R, Lahti S, Tolvanen M, Sipila K. Efficacy of stabilisation splint treatment on the oral health-related quality of life-A randomised controlled one-year follow-up trial. J Oral Rehabil. 2018 May;45(5):355-362. doi: 10.1111/joor.12622.
- Results publication: PubMed 25644634Qvintus V, Suominen AL, Huttunen J, Raustia A, Ylostalo P, Sipila K. Efficacy of stabilisation splint treatment on facial pain - 1-year follow-up. J Oral Rehabil. 2015 Jun;42(6):439-46. doi: 10.1111/joor.12275. Epub 2015 Jan 17.
Related trials for Temporomandibular Disorder
Not yet recruiting
Comparing Dextrose Prolotherapy vs. Sodium Hyaluronic Acid Injections for Jaw Joint Internal Derangement
Temporomandibular Joint Internal Derangement, TMJ-ID
Recruiting
R01_Pilot Jaw Muscle Phenotypes
Chronic TMD Pain, Temporomandibular Disorder
Recruiting
Evaluation of the Effect of Adding Sodium Bicarbonate to Lidocaine in the Treatment of Myofascial Pain Syndrome
Myofacial Pain, Myofacial Pain Syndrome
Recruiting
Clinical and Electromyographic Assessment of Occlusal Splint Therapy
Temporomandibular Joint Disorders
Recruiting
An Open Label Study Assessing REN Treatment in Headache Management in Temporomandibular Disorders
Temporomandibular Disorder, Orofacial Pain
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Kirsi Sipilä, Professor principal investigator
Research Unit of Oral Health Sciences, University of Oulu, Finland
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Stabilization splint treatment in people with Temporomandibular Disorder and Facial Pain, run by University of Oulu.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 15 Feb 2022. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Change in facial pain intensity (time frame: from baseline to 1-year follow-up). The study lists 10 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05240703, which also lists 4 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 15 Feb 2022; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 4 Nov 2026.