ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences
Effectiveness of Arthrocentesis versus Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections in TMJ Disorders: A Clinical Study.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorders affect a significant proportion of the population, leading to pain, joint dysfunction, and reduced quality of life. Arthrocentesis and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections are two widely used conservative treatments. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of arthrocentesis and PRP in improving pain relief, mouth opening, and functional outcomes in TMJ disorder patients. Methods: A total of 60 patients diagnosed with TMJ disorders were enrolled and divided into two groups ( Results: Both treatment groups showed significant improvement. The PRP group demonstrated superior long-term pain relief (VAS: 7.2 to 2.1) compared to arthrocentesis (VAS: 7.4 to 3.5) at 3 months. MMO improved in both groups, with PRP showing a greater increase (35.5 mm to 43.8 mm) than arthrocentesis (34.9 mm to 41.2 mm). Functional limitation scores also improved more significantly in the PRP group. Conclusion: PRP injections provided better long-term outcomes in terms of pain relief and functional improvement compared to arthrocentesis, suggesting its potential as a more effective conservative treatment for TMJ disorders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.