Skip to main content
. 2018 Jan 9;8:725. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2017.00725

Table 2.

Distribution of clinical findings and putative contributing factors for temporomandibular disorder (TMD).

Total (n = 219) wTMD group n (%) pTMD group n (%) iTMD group n (%) p-Value Post hoc analysis
TMJ noise
No 48 (63.16) 18 (31.03) 26 (30.59) <0.0001 wTMD–pTMD
Yes 28 (36.84) 40 (68.97) 59 (69.41) wTMD–iTMD
TMJ pain
No 5 (6.58) 6 (10.34) 10 (11.76) 0.531 n.s.
Yes 71 (93.42) 52 (89.66) 75 (88.24)
Mouth opening limitation
No 59 (77.63) 40 (68.97) 63 (74.12) 0.526 n.s.
Yes 17 (22.37) 18 (31.03) 22 (25.88)
Bruxism
No 69 (90.79) 52 (89.66) 71 (83.53) 0.326 n.s.
Yes 7 (9.21) 6 (10.34) 14 (17.07)
Clenching
No 69 (90.79) 47 (81.03) 58 (68.24) 0.007 wTMD–iTMD
Yes 7 (9.21) 11 (18.97) 27 (31.76) pTMD–iTMD
Tinnitus
No 51 (67.11) 40 (68.97) 60 (70.59) 0.893 n.s.
Yes 25 (32.89) 18 (31.03) 25 (29.41)
Headache
No 28 (36.84) 32 (55.17) 42 (49.41) 0.087 n.s.
Yes 48 (63.16) 26 (44.83) 43 (50.59)
Stressful condition
No 52 (68.42) 26 (44.83) 42 (49.41) <0.0001 wTMD–pTMD
Yes 24 (31.58) 32 (55.17) 43 (50.59) wTMD–iTMD, pTMD–iTMD
Sleep problem
No 75 (96.68) 52 (89.16) 81 (95.29) 0.059 n.s.
Yes 1 (1.32) 6 (10.34) 4 (4.71)

p-Value was obtained from χ2 test and the mean difference between groups was obtained by post hoc analysis with Boneferroni test. p-Value significance was set at <0.05.

wTMD–pTMD, when the proportion of the presence of variable was significantly different between wTMD and pTMD groups; wTMD–iTMD, when the proportion of the presence of variable was significantly different between wTMD and iTMD groups; pTMD–iTMD, when the proportion of the presence of variable was significantly different between pTMD and iTMD groups; n.s., when there was no significant difference between groups; TMJ, temporomandibular joint.