Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Nov 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Pain. 2011 Nov;12(11 Suppl):T27–T45. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2011.09.001

Table 1.

Variation Between Temporomandibular Disorder (TMD) Cases and Controls in Putative Etiologic Factors Measured Categorically

Putative Risk Factor Category Controls
TMD Cases
P Value Site-Adjusted Effect
Fully-Adjusted Effect
N Column % N Column % OR§ 95% CI OR 95% CI
Lifetime Hx of external injury to jaw Yes 126 8.2 46 30.5 <.0001 4.5 3.0, 6.7 4.2 2.8, 6.5
No [ref]* 1,408 91.8 105 69.5
Jaw injury due to yawning Yes 44 2.7 30 16.2 <.0001 7.0 4.2, 11.6 7.3 4.2, 12.7
No [ref] 1,579 97.3 155 83.8
Jaw injury due to prolonged opening Yes 36 2.2 26 14.1 <.0001 7.2 4.2, 12.4 8.3 4.5, 15.2
No [ref] 1,587 97.8 159 85.9
Ever had orthodontic procedures Yes 694 42.9 110 59.8 <.0001 1.9 1.4, 2.7 1.4 1.0, 2.0
No [ref] 925 57.1 74 40.2
Oral behaviors-checklist: sum score 25–62 458 29.4 147 83.1 <.0001 19.2 10.0, 36.9 16.8 8.6, 32.9
17–24 514 33.0 20 11.3 2.3 1.1, 4.9 1.8 .8, 3.9
0–16 [ref] 585 37.6 10 5.6
*

Reference group used to calculate odds ratios.

P value is from binary logistic regression model evaluating overall association between putative risk factor and case status.

Site-adjusted effects were computed in logistic regression models where the putative risk factor is the main explanatory variable and study site is the covariate. Fully-adjusted effects were computed in logistic regression models that additionally include covariates of age group, gender, and race/ethnicity.

§

Odds ratio.

95% confidence interval for OR.