Reliability and Validity of a New Fingertip-Shaped Pressure Algometer for Assessing Pressure Pain Thresholds in the Temporomandibular Joint and Masticatory Muscles

Aims: To test in vitro and in vivo the reliability and accuracy of a new algometer, the pressure algometer for palpation (PAP), for measuring pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and to compare its features with those of a commercially available pressure algometer. Methods: For in vitro accuracy testing, 6 repeated measurements were made at 8 defined test weights from 0.5 to 5 lb. In vivo validity testing compared the PAP to a standard instrument, the hand-held Somedic algometer, at 16 sites including the masticatory muscles, the temporomandibular joints, and the frontalis (as the control site) in 15 temporomandibular disorder (TMD) cases and 15 controls. Intraexaminer reliability was also assessed for both algometers. Results: In vitro reliability was high, with coefficients of variation of < 5% and a single-measurement standard deviation of 2.1 kPa. Accuracy was also high, with PAP measurements correlating with test weights at r = .99 (P < .001). Repeated measures reliability in vivo was high, with intraclass correlation estimates of 0.73 to 0.96 for the PAP and 0.78 to 0.99 for the Somedic algometer. PPT values correlated moderately between the 2 devices (r ranged from 0.38 to 0.66; P ≤ .05) and were consistently higher for the PAP at all sites (P < .001). Differences between controls and TMD cases were also significant for both algometers (P < .006). Conclusion: Both the PAP and the Somedic algometer showed high reliability. Concurrent validity was demonstrated by statistically significant correlations between the devices. Both showed equally high capacity for differentiating TMD cases from controls. The PAP yielded significantly higher PPTs than the Somedic algometer.

algometry; pressure pain threshold; reliability; temporomandibular disorders; validity

1. Helkimo M. Studies on function and dysfunction of the masticatory system. II. Index for anamnestic and clinical dysfunction and occlusal state. Sven Tandlak Tidskr 1974;67:101–121.

2. Dworkin SF, LeResche L. Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders: Review, criteria, examinations and specifications, critique. J Craniomandib Disord 1992;6:301–355.

3. Okeson P. Orofacial pain: Guidelines for assessment, diagnosis and management. Chicago: Quintessence, 1996:23–24.

4. Duinkerke AS, Luteijn F, Bouman TK, de Jong HP. Reproducibility of a palpation test for the stomatognathic system. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1986;14:80–85.

5. Levitt SR. Predictive value of the TMJ scale in detecting clinically significant symptoms of temporomandibular disorders. J Craniomandib Disord 1990;4:177–185.

6. Fricton JR, Schiffman EL. The craniomandibular index: Validity. J Prosthet Dent 1987;58:222–228.

7. Dworkin SF, LeResche L, DeRouen T, Von Korff M. Assessing clinical signs of temporomandibular disorders: Reliability of clinical examiners. J Prosthet Dent 1990;63:574–579.

8. de Wijer A, Lobbezoo-Scholte AM, Steenks MH, Bosman

F. Reliability of clinical findings in temporomandibular disorders. J Orofac Pain 1995;9:181–191.

9. John MT, Zwijnenburg AJ. Interobserver variability in assessment of signs of TMD. Int J Prosthodont 2001;14:265–270.

10. Jensen K, Andersen HO, Olesen J, Lindblom U. Pressure-pain threshold in human temporal region. Evaluation of a new pressure algometer. Pain 1986;25:313–323.

11. Reeves JL, Jaeger B, Graff-Radford SB. Reliability of the pressure algometer as a measure of myofascial trigger point sensitivity. Pain 1986;24:313–321.

12. Fischer AA. Reliability of the pressure algometer as a measure of myofascial trigger point sensitivity. Pain 1987;28:411–414.

13. Schiffman E, Fricton J, Haley D, Tylka D. A pressure algometer for myofascial pain syndrome: Reliability and validity testing.In: Dubner R, Gebhard GF, Bond MR (eds). Proceedings of the Vth World Congress on Pain. New York: Elsevier, 1988:407–413.

14. Ohrbach R, Gale EN. Pressure pain thresholds, clinical assessment, and differential diagnosis: Reliability and validity in patients with myogenic pain. Pain 1989;39:157–169.

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

16. Vatine JJ, Shapira SC, Magora F, Adler D, Magora A. Electronic pressure algometry of deep pain in healthy volunteers. ArchPhys Med Rehabil 1993;74:526–530.

17. Polianskis R, Graven-Nielsen T, Arendt-Nielsen L. Computer-controlled pneumatic pressure algometry—A new technique for quantitative sensory testing. Eur J Pain 2001;5:267–277.

18. List T, Helkimo M, Falk G. Reliability and validity of a pressure threshold meter in recording tenderness in the masseter muscle and the anterior temporalis muscle. Cranio 1989;7:223–229.

19. Gibbs CH, Karpinia K, Moorhead JE, Maruniak JW, Heins PJ. An algometer for intraoral pain tolerance measurements. J Neurosci Methods 1999;88:135–139.

20. Chung SC, Um BY, Kim HS. Evaluation of pressure pain threshold in head and neck muscles by electronic algometer: Intrarater and interrater reliability. Cranio 1992;10:28–34.

21. Isselee H, De Laat A, Bogaerts K, Lysens R. Short-term reproducibility of pressure pain thresholds in masticatory muscles measured with a new algometer. J Orofac Pain 1998;12:203–209.

22. Bendtsen L, Jensen R, Jensen NK, Olesen J. Muscle palpation with controlled finger pressure: New equipment for the studyof tender myofascial tissues. Pain 1994;59:235–239.

23. Shaefer JR, Jackson DL, Schiffman EL, Anderson QN. Pressure-pain thresholds and MRI effusions in TMJ arthralgia. J Dent Res 2001;80:1935–1939.

24. Ohrbach R, Gale EN. Pressure pain thresholds in normal muscles: Reliability, measurement effects, and topographic differences. Pain 1989;37:257–263.

25. Fleiss JL. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions, ed 2. New York: John Wiley, 1981:321.

26. 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.

27. 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.

28. 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.

29. Fischer AA. Pressure algometry over normal muscles. Standard values, validity and reproducibility of pressure threshold. Pain 1987;30:115–126.

30. Nordahl S, Kopp S. Pressure pain threshold of the posterior aspect of the temporomandibular joint measured with a semi-spherical probe. J Orofac Pain 2003;17:145–150.

31. List T, Helkimo M, Karlsson R. Influence of pressure rates on the reliability of a pressure threshold meter. J Craniomandib Disord 1991;5:173–178.

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

33. Farella M, Michelotti A, Steenks MH, Romeo R, Cimino R, Bosman F. The diagnostic value of pressure algometry in myofascial pain of the jaw muscles. J Oral Rehabil 2000;27:9–14.

34. Reid KI, Gracely RH, Dubner RA. The influence of time, facial side, and location on pain-pressure thresholds in chronic myogenous temporomandibular disorder. J Orofac Pain 1994;8:258–265.