The Smallest Detectable Difference of Mandibular Function Impairment in Patients with a Painfully Restricted Temporomandibular Joint

Abstract

Mandibular functions such as speech, laughing, yawning, mastication, and taking a large bite may be impaired if temporomandibular disorders exist. The Mandibular Function Impairment Questionnaire is a validated instrument that scores perceived difficulty of representative mandibular functions in relation to jaw complaints. However, the reliability of the Mandibular Function Impairment Questionnaire has never been adequately tested. Generalizability and decision studies are currently proposed to assess the reliability of a measurement device. The smallest detectable difference is the smallest statistically significant amount of change to be detected with a measurement device. The purpose of this study was to assess the reliability of the Mandibular Function Impairment Questionnaire in terms of the smallest detectable difference. Twenty-five consecutive patients with painfully restricted temporomandibular joints completed the Mandibular Function Impairment Questionnaire on two separate measurement days, one week apart, using two consecutive sessions per day. Spearman's r was calculated for test-retest reliability. Variance components such as patients, measurement days, repetitions, and all their interactions were analyzed in the generalizability study. In the decision study, the smallest detectable difference was calculated for different days and repetitions. Spearman's r varied from 0.69 to 0.96. The between-patient variance and the error variance contributed 81% and 19% to total variance, respectively. The Mandibular Function Impairment Questionnaire is a reliable instrument for the assessment of mandibular function impairment. The minimal amount of change to be detected is 14 units on a scale of 0 to 68. Reliability in terms of the smallest detectable difference increases if the measurement ' is repeated twice on two separate days: The smallest detectable difference improves to 10 units.

Keywords

reliability generalizability theory MFIQ

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barnett ML , Mathisen A. (1997). Tyranny of the p-value: the conflict between statistical significance and common sense (editorial). J Dent Res 76:534-536.

Bertolami CN , Gay T. , Clark GT , Rendell J. , Shetty V. , Liu C. , et al. (1993). Use of sodium hyaluronate in treating temporomandibular joint disorders: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial . J Oral Maxillofac Surg 51:232-242.

Brennan R. (1983). Elements of generalizability theory. Rev. ed. 1992 ed. Iowa City, IA: The American College Testing Program.

Cronbach JL , Gleser GC , Nanda H. , Rajaratman N. (1972). The dependability of behavioral measurements: theory of generalizability for scores and profiles. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Hayes KW (1992). The effect of awareness of measurement error on physical therapists' confidence in their decisions. Phys Ther 72:515-525.

Hoffman DC , Cubillos L. (1994). The effect of arthroscopic surgery on mandibular range of motion. Cranio 12:11-18.

Jacobson NS , Follette WC , Revenstorf D. (1984). Psychotherapy outcome research: methods of reporting variability and evaluating clinical significance. Behav Ther 15:336-352.

Kropmans ThJB , Dijkstra PU , Stegenga B. , van Veen A. (1998). The smallest detectable difference of maximal mouth opening in patients with a painfully restricted temporomandibular joint (abstract). J Orofac Pain 12:168.

Kropmans ThJB , Dijkstra PU , Stegenga B. , Stewart R. , de Bont Lgm (1999a). Smallest detectable difference in outcome variables related to painful restriction of the temporomandibular joint. J Dent Res 78:784-789.

10.

Kropmans ThJB , Dijkstra PU , Stegenga B. , de Bont Lgm (1999b). Therapeutic outcome assessment in permanent temporomandibular disc joint disc displacement; a systematic review. J Oral Rehabil 26(5).

11.

Mitchell SK (1979). Interobserver agreement, reliability, and generalizability of data collected in observational studies. Psychol Bull 86:376-390.

12.

Roebroeck M. , Harlaar J. , Lankhorst GJ (1993). The application of generalizability theory to reliability assessment: an illustration using isometric force measurements . Phys Ther 6 :386-401.

13.

Stegenga B. , de Bont Lgm , de Leeuw R. , Boering G. (1993). Assessment of mandibular function impairment associated with temporomandibular joint osteoarthrosis and internal derangement. J Orofac Pain 7:183-195.

14.

Stratford P. (1989). Reliability: consistency or differentiating among subjects? (letter). Phys Ther 69:299-300.