Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) encompass a heterogeneous group of musculoskeletal and neuromuscular conditions affecting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) and masticatory system. Due to academic stress and parafunctional habits, dental students may be particularly vulnerable to TMD. Objective: To determine the prevalence of TMD symptoms and their psychosocial and functional correlates among students at the Faculty of Dental Medicine, UMPh Iasi, Romania, using the diagnostic criteria for TMD (DC/TMD) self-report axis and axis II instruments. Methods: In this cross-sectional survey, 356 volunteer students (66.0% female; mean age, 22.9 ± 3.6 years) out of a total population of 1874 completed an online DC/TMD–based questionnaire. Axis I assessed orofacial pain, joint noises, and mandibular locking. Axis II instruments included the Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS), Jaw Functional Limitation Scale (JFLS-20), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7), and Oral Behaviors Checklist (OBC). Descriptive statistics summarized frequencies, means, and standard deviations; χ² tests and t-tests compared subgroups by sex; Pearson correlations explored relationships among continuous measures (α = 0.05). Results: A total of 5% of respondents reported orofacial pain in the past 30 days; 41.6% observed TMJ noises; 19.7% experienced locking episodes. Mean JFLS score was 28.3 ± 30.5, with 4.8% scoring > 80 (severe limitation). Mean PHQ-9 was 5.96 ± 5.37 (mild depression); 15.5% scored ≥ 10. Mean GAD-7 was 5.20 ± 4.95 (mild anxiety); 16.0% scored ≥ 10. Mean OBC score was 12.3 ± 8.5; 30.1% scored ≥ 16, indicating frequent parafunctional habits. Symptom prevalence was similar by sex, except temporal headache (43.4% females vs. 24.3% males; p = 0.0008). Females reported higher mean scores for pain intensity (2.09 vs. 1.55; p = 0.0013), JFLS (32.5 vs. 18.0; p < 0.001), PHQ-9 (6.43 vs. 5.16; p = 0.048), and OBC (13.9 vs. 9.7; p = 0.0014). Strong correlation was observed between PHQ-9 and GAD-7 (r = 0.74; p < 0.001); moderate correlations were observed between pain intensity and PHQ-9 (r = 0.31) or GAD-7 (r = 0.30), between JFLS and pain intensity (r = 0.33), and between OBC and PHQ-9 (r = 0.39) (all p < 0.001). Conclusions: Nearly half of dental students reported TMD symptoms, with appreciable functional limitation and psychosocial impact. Parafunctional behaviors and psychological distress were significantly associated with pain and dysfunction. These findings underscore the need for early screening, stress-management interventions, and interdisciplinary care strategies in the dental student population.

The stomatognathic system, which includes the jaw and associated muscles, can suffer from dysfunctions like hypertonia (muscle tightness). This condition is often treated with miorelaxants, medications that relax muscles, with Botulinum toxin (Botox) being one of the most effective options. Clinical cases have shown that Botox can significantly alleviate symptoms of temporomandibular disorders (TMDs), which are characterized by pain and restricted jaw movement.

Background/Objectives: Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) are musculoskeletal conditions in which rehabilitation aims to reduce pain and restore mandibular mobility and function. We estimated the between-group effects of conservative and minimally invasive treatments versus inactive controls and examined important sources of variation. Methods: We included randomized controlled trials published in 2015–2025 in adults diagnosed with RDC/TMD or DC/TMD. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus and CENTRAL were searched, with the final searches completed in January 2026. The review was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251250251). We synthesized comparisons of conservative and minimally invasive treatments with inactive controls in adults with TMD. Random-effects meta-analyses used REML and modified Hartung–Knapp confidence intervals. Two human reviewers independently assessed risk of bias with RoB 2 and certainty with GRADE. Results: Thirty-five studies contributed to 69 effects. Compared with inactive controls, short-term pain was 1.31 points lower on a 0–10 scale (95% CI 0.62–2.00; 23 studies; very-low certainty) and 0.94 points lower (95% CI 0.15–1.74) after high-risk results were excluded. Mouth opening was 1.96 mm greater (95% CI 0.33–3.60; 26 effects from 25 studies; very-low certainty) and 0.75 mm greater (95% CI −0.62 to 2.12) after high-risk results were excluded; the latter confidence interval included no difference. Prediction intervals included no benefit. Evidence for jaw function, oral-health-related quality of life and longer-term effects was sparse. None of the 73 result-specific risk-of-bias assessments was low risk, and 25 were high risk. Conclusions: The average short-term pain benefit was modest and decreased after high-risk results were removed. The mouth-opening difference became inconclusive after high-risk results were excluded. These descriptive pooled estimates support transparent discussion of uncertainty in rehabilitation practice but should not be used to rank treatments or predict an individual response.

Indirect posterior restorations combining complete occlusal coverage with extension onto an axial surface are described inconsistently, and their biomechanical advantage remains uncertain. This review compared failure load and a review-defined severe-failure category of morphology-defined axial-extension restorations with occlusal-only restorations and full-coverage crowns. PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched from inception and last checked on 22 July 2026; citation searching supplemented the database searches. Eligible studies tested restorations meeting the morphological definition in extracted human posterior teeth. Two reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and appraised risk of bias using RoBDEMAT with QUIN as a supplementary appraisal. Multiple eligible intervention arms were combined, and shared comparators were counted once. Exploratory random-effects models estimated average effects across heterogeneous laboratory systems using ratios of means (RoMs) and mean differences (MDs) for failure load and risk ratios (RRs) for review-defined severe failure. Eight studies were included. Five independent studies contributed to the main comparison, restricted to single-surface axial-extension versus occlusal-only restorations. Failure-load estimates were inconclusive (RoM 0.98, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.09; MD −23 N, 95% CI −195 to 149). Severe-failure events were sparse and inconsistently defined across the source studies; exact counts were therefore primary, and the pooled RR was exploratory (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.86). Three studies compared axial-extension restorations with crowns, but these heterogeneous comparisons were not pooled and remained inconclusive. Current in vitro evidence is insufficient to determine whether the evaluated axial-extension designs affect failure load or the occurrence of review-defined severe failure. Imprecision, methodological heterogeneity, and indirectness for clinical performance preclude claims of clinical superiority. A routine strength benefit of the evaluated axial-extension designs cannot be inferred. Standardized preparation definitions, testing protocols, and failure reporting are required. Registration: OSF, DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/9PXE5 (retrospective).

The masticatory apparatus, which includes the jaw and related muscles, can suffer from dysfunctions like muscle rigidity. This condition is often treated with muscle relaxants, medications that ease muscle tension, with Botulinum toxin (Botox) being one of the most effective options. Clinical cases have demonstrated that Botox can significantly alleviate symptoms of temporomandibular joint disorders, characterized by pain and restricted jaw movement.