↓ Skip to main content

Occlusal stabilization splint for patients with temporomandibular disorders: Meta-analysis of short and long term effects

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
100 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
271 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Occlusal stabilization splint for patients with temporomandibular disorders: Meta-analysis of short and long term effects
Published in
PLOS ONE, February 2017
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0171296
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jovana Kuzmanovic Pficer, Slobodan Dodic, Vojkan Lazic, Goran Trajkovic, Natasa Milic, Biljana Milicic

Abstract

Psychological discomfort, physical disability and functional limitations of the orofacial system have a major impact on everyday life of patients with temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). In this study we sought to determine short and long term effects of stabilization splint (SS) in treatment of TMDs, and to identify factors influencing its efficacy. MEDLINE, Web of Science and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing SS to: non-occluding splint, occlusal oral appliances, physiotherapy, behavioral therapy, counseling and no treatment. Random effects method was used to summarize outcomes. The effect estimates were expressed as odds ratio (OR) or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval. Subgroup analyses were carried out according to the use of Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC/TMD) and TMDs origin. Strength of evidence was assessed by GRADE. Meta-regression was applied. Thirty three eligible RCTs were included in meta-analysis. In short term, SS presented positive overall effect on pain reduction (OR 2.08; p = 0.01) and pain intensity (SMD -0.33; p = 0.02). Subgroup analyses confirmed SS effect in studies used RDC/TMD and revealed its effect in patients with TMDs of muscular origin. Important decrease of muscle tenderness (OR 1.97; p = 0.03) and improvement of mouth opening (SMD -0.30; p = 0.04) were found. SS in comparison to oral appliances showed no difference (OR 0.74; p = 0.24). Meta-regression identified continuous use of SS during the day as a factor influencing efficacy (p = 0.01). Long term results showed no difference in observed outcomes between groups. Low quality of evidence was found for primary outcomes. SS presented short term benefit for patients with TMDs. In long term follow up, the effect is equalized with other therapeutic modalities. Further studies based on appropriate use of standardized criteria for patient recruitment and outcomes under assessment are needed to better define SS effect persistence in long term.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 271 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 271 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 33 12%
Student > Bachelor 31 11%
Student > Postgraduate 29 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 6%
Other 60 22%
Unknown 83 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 128 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 22 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Materials Science 4 1%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 1%
Other 13 5%
Unknown 93 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 March 2022.
All research outputs
#2,204,420
of 23,365,820 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#27,889
of 199,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,465
of 422,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#646
of 4,236 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,365,820 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 199,849 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 422,436 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,236 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.