Pressure Pain Threshold of the Posterior Aspect of the Temporomandibular Joint Measured with a Semi-Spherical Probe

Aims: To develop and test a probe for measurement of the pres-sure pain threshold (PPT) over the posterior aspect of the tem-poromandibular joint (TMJ) in healthy individuals, including determination of PPT levels, reliability, and the smallest detectable difference (SDD) between measurements. Methods: A semi-spheri-cal probe was designed to measure PPT levels over the posterior aspect of the TMJ through the external auditory meatus. The probe was connected to an electronic algometer. Three consecutive measurements were performed with this probe over the posterior and lateral aspects of the left and right TMJs as well as over a ref-erence point on the forehead (glabella) in 31 healthy subjects: 10 male and 21 female. Measurements were also performed for com-parison with a conventional flat probe with a 1 cm2 area over the lateral aspect of the TMJ and the reference point. Results: The PPT measured with the semi-spherical probe and the conventional probe showed similar degrees of interindividual variation and reproducibility. The relative SDD, expressed as the percentage of the mean PPT for 2 measurements, showed similar levels for the flat and semi-spherical probes, ie, 28% to 32% of the mean PPT at the TMJ. Conclusion: The semi-spherical probe shows similar reliability and relative SDD for measurement of PPT levels over the posterior aspect of the TMJ in healthy individuals as measure-ment over the lateral aspect with a flat probe. Measurement of the posterior PPT with a semi-spherical probe may be a useful adjunct to conventional lateral PPT measurements.

algometer probe; healthy; pressure pain threshold; smallest detectable difference; temporomandibular joint

1. Jensen K. Quantification of tenderness by palpation and use of pressure algometer. In: Fricton JR, Awad E (eds). Advances in Pain Research and Therapy. New York: Raven Press, 1990(17):165–181.

2. Kosek E, Ekholm J, Nordemar R. A comparison of pressure pain thresholds in different tissues and body regions. Long-term reliability of pressure algometry in healthy volunteers. Scand J Rehabil Med 1993;25:117–124.

3. Antonaci F, Sand T, Lucas GA. Pressure algometry in healthy subjects: Interexaminer variability. Scand J Rehabil Med 1998;30:3–8.

4. Chung SC, Kim JH, Kim HS. Reliability and validity of the pressure pain thresholds (PPT) in the TMJ capsules by electronic algometer. Cranio 1993;11:171–176.

5. Goulet JP, Clark GT, Flack VF, Liu C. The reproducibility of muscle and joint tenderness detection methods and maximum mandibular movement measurement for the temporomandibular system. J Orofac Pain 1998;12: 17–26.

6. Fredriksson L, Alstergren P, Kopp S. Absolute and relative facial pressure-pain thresholds in healthy individuals. J Orofac Pain 2000;14:98–104.

7. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307–310.

8. Kropmans TJ, Dijkstra PU, Stegenga B, Stewart R, de Bont LG. Smallest detectable difference in outcome variables related to the painful restriction of the temporo-mandibular joint. J Dent Res 1999;78:784–789.

9. Agerberg G. Longitudinal variation of maximal mandibular mobility: An intra-individual study. J Prosthet Dent 1987;58:370–373.

10. Stegenga B, de Bont LG, de Leeuw R, Boering G. Assessment of mandibular function impairment associated with temporomandibular joint osteoarthrosis and internal derangement. J Orofac Pain 1993;7:183–195.

11. Lassere MN, van der Heijde D, Johnson KR, Boers M, Edmonds J. Reliability of measures of disease activity and disease damage in rheumatoid arthritis: Implications for smallest detectable difference, minimal clinically important difference, and analysis of treatment effects in ran-domized controlled trials. J Rheumatol 2001;28:892–903.