Search

Background: Pain in the orofacial region is often reported after whiplash trauma. However, prospective studies evaluating clinical signs related to orofacial pain and disability in whiplash populations are rare. The aim of the present study was to evaluate clinical signs related to pain and dysfunction in orofacial and neck regions after whiplash trauma, in a short- and long-term perspective. Methods: In total, 84 cases (48 women) diagnosed with neck distortion after a car accident and 116 controls (68 women) were examined within 1 month, and 49 cases (27 women) and 71 controls (41 women) were re-examined 2 years later. Outcome measures were pain on palpation of jaw and neck muscles and maximal jaw opening. Analysis was performed using mixed-models. Results: Cases and women were at higher risk for pain on palpation of jaw muscles (OR:7.7; p < 0.001 and OR:3.2; p = 0.010 respectively) and neck muscles (OR:12.7; p < 0.001 and OR:2.9; p = 0.020 respectively) but with no significant effect of time. Cases and women also had lower maximal jaw opening (−3.1; p = 0.001 and −3.3; p = 0.001 respectively). There was no significant time effect, but a significant interaction between cases and time (2.2; p = 0.004). Conclusion: Individuals with a whiplash trauma present a higher risk for pain on palpation in jaw and neck muscles both in a short- and long-term perspective, but show normal jaw movements. No time effect suggests that cases do not spontaneously improve nor get worse. Investigating pain on palpation in the jaw and neck muscles after whiplash trauma can identify individuals at risk for developing long-term orofacial pain and dysfunction. Significance: Orofacial pain is often reported after whiplash trauma but most previous studies concerning orofacial pain in whiplash populations have been questionnaire studies. Cases with a previous whiplash trauma and women, in general, had higher risk for pain on palpation in the jaw and neck region. Investigating pain on palp

BACKGROUND: The jaw and neck motor systems have a close functional integration but the effect of resistance load to the mandible during jaw opening on the jaw-neck integration is not known. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of resistance load compared to no load on integrated jaw and neck motor function in individuals free from pain and dysfunction in the jaw and neck regions. METHODS: Jaw and head movements during continuous jaw opening were recorded with an optoelectronic system (MacReflex®) in 26 pain-free individuals (14 women, 12 men, mean age 22 years). Jaw opening was performed with and without resistance load (1600 g) to the mandible. The relationship between jaw movement amplitude, head movement amplitude, head/jaw ratio (quotient of head and jaw movement amplitude) and resistance load were modelled using linear mixed-model analysis. A p-value <.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The expected head/jaw ratio mean was increased by 0.05 (95% CI: 0.03, 0.08, P<0.001) with resistance load as compared to no load. This corresponds to an increase in expected mean by 55.6%. With resistance load, expected mean head movement amplitude increased by 1.4 mm (95% CI: 0.2, 2.5, P=0.018), and expected mean jaw movement amplitude decreased by 3.7 mm (95% CI: -7.0, -0.5, P=0.025). CONCLUSION: There is a compensation and adaptation of integrated jaw-neck motor function with an altered jaw-neck motor strategy during jaw opening with resistance load compared to no load. The head/jaw ratio demonstrates increased proportional involvement of the neck during increased load on the jaw system.