Comparison of Axis II psychosocial assessment methods of RDC/TMD and DC/TMD as part of DC/TMD-FIN phase II validation studies in tertiary care Finnish TMD pain patients
Hietaharju, Maria; Kivimäki, Ida; Heikkilä, Henriikka; Näpänkangas, Ritva; Teerijoki-Oksa, Tuija; Tanner, Johanna; Tolvanen, Mimmi; Suvinen, Tuija; Sipilä, Kirsi (2021-09-19)
Hietaharju, M, Kivimäki, I, Heikkilä, H, et al. Comparison of Axis II psychosocial assessment methods of RDC/TMD and DC/TMD as part of DC/TMD-FIN phase II validation studies in tertiary care Finnish TMD pain patients. J Oral Rehabil. 2021; 48: 1295–1306. doi:10.1111/joor.13260
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Hietaharju, M, Kivimäki, I, Heikkilä, H, et al. Comparison of Axis II psychosocial assessment methods of RDC/TMD and DC/TMD as part of DC/TMD-FIN phase II validation studies in tertiary care Finnish TMD pain patients. J Oral Rehabil. 2021; 48: 1295–1306, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/joor.13260. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.
https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2021111755784
Tiivistelmä
Abstract
Background: The Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) and Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD) include Axis II instruments for psychosocial assessment.
Objectives: The aims were to compare the Finnish versions of Axis II psychosocial assessment methods of the RDC/TMD and DC/TMD and to study their internal reliability.
Methods: The sample comprised 197 tertiary care referral TMD pain patients. The associations between RDC/TMD [Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS) 1.0, Symptom Check List 90-revised (SCL-90R)] and DC/TMD (GCPS 2.0, Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), PHQ-15) assessment instruments were evaluated using Spearman correlation coefficients, Wilcoxon Signed Rank s, chi-squared test and gamma statistics. The internal reliability and internal inter-item consistency of SCL-90-R, PHQ-9, PHQ-15 and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) were evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient values.
Results: The DC/TMD and RDC/TMD Axis II psychosocial instruments correlated strongly (p < .001). GCPS 1.0 and GCPS 2.0 grades were similarly distributed based on both criteria. The RDC/TMD psychological instruments had a higher tendency to subclassify patients with more severe symptoms of depression and non-specific physical symptoms compared to DC/TMD. The internal reliability and internal inter-item consistency were high for the psychological assessment instruments.
Conclusions: The Finnish versions of the RDC/TMD and DC/TMD Axis II psychosocial instruments correlated strongly among tertiary care TMD pain patients. Furthermore, the Axis II psychological assessment instruments indicated high validity and internal inter-item consistency and are applicable in Finnish TMD pain patients as part of other comprehensive specialist level assessments, but further psychometric and cut-off evaluations are still needed.
Kokoelmat
- Avoin saatavuus [31657]