Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of disability, the most common form of chronic disease in the temporomandibular joint (TMJ), and the most severe disease type of temporomandibular disorders (TMD). The etiology of TMD is multifactorial, considering parafunctional habits, sleep bruxism, or sleep disturbance as common factors. Insomnia and apnea are the two most frequent forms of sleep disorders in TMD patients. Due to this, the objective of this systematic review was to highlight whether there is currently scientific evidence in the literature describing that patients with temporomandibular joint osteoarthritis (TMJ-OA) are associated with increased sleep disorders or impaired sleep quality. Methods: This systematic review was completed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement and was registered with PROSPERO prior to completion of the main search. Original observational studies that analyze the association of sleep disorders and sleep quality in patients with TMJ-OA were included in the present review. Results: 770 studies were screened by abstract and title according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, and finally, 7 articles were included in the qualitative synthesis and a total of 772 patients diagnosed with TMJ-OA. Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to indicate that patients with TMJ OA are associated with increased sleep disorders or poorer sleep quality.

There is a broad consensus accepting that psychological variables such as stress, anxiety, or depression play an important role in bruxism. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an increase in stress, anxiety, and depression levels. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on possible awake and sleep bruxism prevalence and on the psychological factors associated with bruxism, comparing pre-pandemic, pandemic/lockdown, and post-pandemic samples of first-year students. A total of 274 dentistry students from the Complutense University of Madrid participated in the study: 92 from 2018/2019 (pre-pandemic), 90 from 2020/2021 (pandemic), and 92 students from 2021/2022 (post-pandemic) academic years. The participants filled out a thorough battery of validated questionnaires evaluating bruxism and different psychological characteristics, such as anxiety, depression, somatization, personality, and stress coping styles. While sleep bruxism prevalence was significantly higher for the pandemic group, awake bruxism was smaller in comparison to pre-pandemic and post-pandemic groups. The post-pandemic group also presented higher levels of neuroticism and agreeableness personality traits, and positive reappraisal than the pre-pandemic group, with the pandemic group somewhere in between. Additionally, both the pandemic and post-pandemic group showed higher levels of depression and acceptance/resignation coping styles than the pre-pandemic group. Thus, among the three groups of students, the post-pandemic group was the one that showed a larger effect of the pandemic situation in their psychological variables, presenting higher levels of anxiety (state and trait), depression, acceptation/resignation coping style, higher neuroticism (emotional instability trait), and lower agreeableness trait. Nonetheless, the increase of positive reappraisal in the post-pandemic group (an adaptive coping stress style) might be also a sign of recovery. The higher sleep bruxism for the pandemic group might be related to the pandemic situation and lockdown, passively suffered, possibly promoting feelings of impotency, increased levels of depression and acceptance/resignation (normally considered a passive/maladaptive coping style), while acute stressful situations derived from daily personal social interactions might have increased anxiety levels and induced higher levels of awake bruxism observed in both the pre-pandemic and post-pandemic groups. However, further research, including larger and more representative samples, is needed to confirm this possible relationship.

Background: Many studies have revealed high comorbidity and a clear association between temporomandibular disorders (TMD) and migraine. Furthermore, evidence points out that common psychological and behavioral factors might be related to the observed TMD and migraine association. However, this association and the underlying psychological factors are poorly understood. Objective: The main goal of this study was to describe the psychological and behavioral factors involved in TMD myalgia and migraine. Methods: A sample of 142 participants were recruited to form 4 groups: migraine patients (ICHD-III criteria), painful-TMD patients (Myalgia DC/TMD criteria), patients suffering from both pathologies according to the same criteria, and control patients. After a dental and neurological examination, the patients filled several psychological questionnaires validated for the Spanish population to assess anxiety (STAI), depression (DEP), stress coping (CRI), and somatic, anxiety, and depression symptoms (BSI-18). Results: The TMD myalgia patients, in general, showed a state of elevated anxiety, somatization, and reduced coping strategies, while the patients with migraine presented greater anxiety symptoms, depression (dysthymia trait and state), and somatization. Conclusions: According to the data of the present study, situational anxiety (transient emotional state), together with the lack of coping strategies, could be more associated with TMD myalgia, while anxiety, as a more stable and long-lasting emotional state, together with depression, might be more related to migraine. Further longitudinal studies are needed to unravel whether these differentiated profiles are a consequence or possible risk factors for migraine and TMD.

The aims of the study are to analyze the influence of pain and no pain expectations on the physiological (electromyography (EMG) and pupillometry) and cognitive (Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)) response to pain. Pain expectation and no pain expectation situations were induced by employing instructional videos. The induction of pain was performed by palpating the masseter with an algometer in a sample of 2 groups: 30 healthy participants (control group) and 30 patients (Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) group) with chronic myofascial pain with referral in the masseter muscle (Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Dissorders (DC/TMD)). Used a mixed design all participants were exposed to pain and no pain conditions in the same session, but the order of the presentation was counterbalanced across participants to control its possible influence. A significantly larger pupillary diameter was observed in the pain expectation relative to the no pain expectation condition in both groups. The TMD group presented larger EMG activity and larger scores in anxiety, somatization, catastrophizing and central sensitization than the control group. In the NRS, the TMD group also showed a significantly higher score than the control group. The TMD group presented similar NRS scores in the expectation condition compared to the no pain expectation condition, while the control group presented higher scores for pain expectation than for no pain expectation. Pain expectation modulated the pain cognitive pain assessment and pupil diameter in controls. The cognitive pain assessment was altered in the TMD group compared to the control group, particularly in the no pain expectation condition, this may be due to a negative reappraisal of pain due to past experiences, as pointed out by the observed level of catastrophizing. Pain expectations did not influence the EMG, significantly higher EMG activity was found in the TMD group compared to the control group regardless of expectation type.