Cargando…

Orofacial quantitative sensory testing: Current evidence and future perspectives

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Orofacial quantitative sensory testing (QST) is an increasingly valuable psychophysical tool for evaluating neurosensory disorders of the orofacial region. Here, we aimed to evaluate the current evidence regarding this testing method and to discuss its future clinical poten...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Van der Cruyssen, Fréderic, Van Tieghem, Loes, Croonenborghs, Tomas‐Marijn, Baad‐Hansen, Lene, Svensson, Peter, Renton, Tara, Jacobs, Reinhilde, Politis, Constantinus, De Laat, Antoon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7497080/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32557971
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejp.1611
_version_ 1783583239902855168
author Van der Cruyssen, Fréderic
Van Tieghem, Loes
Croonenborghs, Tomas‐Marijn
Baad‐Hansen, Lene
Svensson, Peter
Renton, Tara
Jacobs, Reinhilde
Politis, Constantinus
De Laat, Antoon
author_facet Van der Cruyssen, Fréderic
Van Tieghem, Loes
Croonenborghs, Tomas‐Marijn
Baad‐Hansen, Lene
Svensson, Peter
Renton, Tara
Jacobs, Reinhilde
Politis, Constantinus
De Laat, Antoon
author_sort Van der Cruyssen, Fréderic
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Orofacial quantitative sensory testing (QST) is an increasingly valuable psychophysical tool for evaluating neurosensory disorders of the orofacial region. Here, we aimed to evaluate the current evidence regarding this testing method and to discuss its future clinical potential. DATA TREATMENT: We conducted a literature search in Medline, Embase and Scopus for English‐language articles published between 1990 and 2019. The utilized search terms included QST, quantitative, sensory testing and neurosensory, which were combined using the AND operator with the terms facial, orofacial, trigeminal, intraoral and oral. RESULTS: Our findings highlighted many methods for conducting QST—including method of levels, method of limits and mapping. Potential stimuli also vary, and can include mechanical or thermal stimulation, vibration or pinprick stimuli. Orofacial QST may be helpful in revealing disease pathways and can be used for patient stratification to validate the use of neurosensory profile‐specific treatment options. QST is reportedly reliable in longitudinal studies and is thus a candidate for measuring changes over time. One disadvantage of QST is the substantial time required; however, further methodological refinements and the combination of partial aspects of the full QST battery with other tests and imaging methods should result in improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, orofacial QST is a reliable testing method for diagnosing pathological neurosensory conditions and assessing normal neurosensory function. Despite the remaining challenges that hinder the use of QST for everyday clinical decisions and clinical trials, we expect that future improvements will allow its implementation in routine practice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7497080
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74970802020-09-25 Orofacial quantitative sensory testing: Current evidence and future perspectives Van der Cruyssen, Fréderic Van Tieghem, Loes Croonenborghs, Tomas‐Marijn Baad‐Hansen, Lene Svensson, Peter Renton, Tara Jacobs, Reinhilde Politis, Constantinus De Laat, Antoon Eur J Pain Review Articles BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Orofacial quantitative sensory testing (QST) is an increasingly valuable psychophysical tool for evaluating neurosensory disorders of the orofacial region. Here, we aimed to evaluate the current evidence regarding this testing method and to discuss its future clinical potential. DATA TREATMENT: We conducted a literature search in Medline, Embase and Scopus for English‐language articles published between 1990 and 2019. The utilized search terms included QST, quantitative, sensory testing and neurosensory, which were combined using the AND operator with the terms facial, orofacial, trigeminal, intraoral and oral. RESULTS: Our findings highlighted many methods for conducting QST—including method of levels, method of limits and mapping. Potential stimuli also vary, and can include mechanical or thermal stimulation, vibration or pinprick stimuli. Orofacial QST may be helpful in revealing disease pathways and can be used for patient stratification to validate the use of neurosensory profile‐specific treatment options. QST is reportedly reliable in longitudinal studies and is thus a candidate for measuring changes over time. One disadvantage of QST is the substantial time required; however, further methodological refinements and the combination of partial aspects of the full QST battery with other tests and imaging methods should result in improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, orofacial QST is a reliable testing method for diagnosing pathological neurosensory conditions and assessing normal neurosensory function. Despite the remaining challenges that hinder the use of QST for everyday clinical decisions and clinical trials, we expect that future improvements will allow its implementation in routine practice. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-06-17 2020-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7497080/ /pubmed/32557971 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejp.1611 Text en © 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Pain published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Pain Federation EFIC ® This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Articles
Van der Cruyssen, Fréderic
Van Tieghem, Loes
Croonenborghs, Tomas‐Marijn
Baad‐Hansen, Lene
Svensson, Peter
Renton, Tara
Jacobs, Reinhilde
Politis, Constantinus
De Laat, Antoon
Orofacial quantitative sensory testing: Current evidence and future perspectives
title Orofacial quantitative sensory testing: Current evidence and future perspectives
title_full Orofacial quantitative sensory testing: Current evidence and future perspectives
title_fullStr Orofacial quantitative sensory testing: Current evidence and future perspectives
title_full_unstemmed Orofacial quantitative sensory testing: Current evidence and future perspectives
title_short Orofacial quantitative sensory testing: Current evidence and future perspectives
title_sort orofacial quantitative sensory testing: current evidence and future perspectives
topic Review Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7497080/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32557971
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejp.1611
work_keys_str_mv AT vandercruyssenfrederic orofacialquantitativesensorytestingcurrentevidenceandfutureperspectives
AT vantieghemloes orofacialquantitativesensorytestingcurrentevidenceandfutureperspectives
AT croonenborghstomasmarijn orofacialquantitativesensorytestingcurrentevidenceandfutureperspectives
AT baadhansenlene orofacialquantitativesensorytestingcurrentevidenceandfutureperspectives
AT svenssonpeter orofacialquantitativesensorytestingcurrentevidenceandfutureperspectives
AT rentontara orofacialquantitativesensorytestingcurrentevidenceandfutureperspectives
AT jacobsreinhilde orofacialquantitativesensorytestingcurrentevidenceandfutureperspectives
AT politisconstantinus orofacialquantitativesensorytestingcurrentevidenceandfutureperspectives
AT delaatantoon orofacialquantitativesensorytestingcurrentevidenceandfutureperspectives