Background: Temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) are musculoskeletal and neuromuscular conditions affecting the temporomandibular joint and associated structures. Cognitive‐behavioural therapy (CBT) has emerged as a potential intervention for TMDs, but its comparative effectiveness against standard treatments remains unclear. This systematic review aimed to evaluate and compare the efficacy of CBT versus standard treatment interventions in managing TMDs.Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted across multiple databases using MeSH keywords and Boolean operators. Inclusion criteria encompassed clinical trials comparing CBT/CBT in combination with standard treatment interventions or a control group in individuals with TMDs. The primary outcome measured was pain. Secondary outcomes such as disability, depression and jaw function were also looked into. Two reviewers independently assessed for the eligibility of the articles and conducted data extraction. Quality assessments were performed using RoB 2.0 for randomised clinical trials.Results: The initial search identified 623 articles, of which a total of eight clinical studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the systematic review. Seven out of eight studies demonstrated improvements in outcomes related to TMD. Pain was significantly decreased in studies that showed a positive outcome. Jaw function, quality of life and psychological well‐being were superior among individuals receiving CBT alone or in combination with conventional modalities, as well as hypnotic therapy coupled with CBT‐based interventions. The quality of studies assessed showed all articles to be of good quality as per RoB‐2 evaluation.Conclusion: This systematic review highlights the potential benefits of CBT in managing TMDs, suggesting its effectiveness in improving pain outcomes and enhancing overall well‐being. The findings indicate that CBT may be a valuable adjunct or alternative to standard treatment interventions for individuals with TMDs. However, further research with larger sample sizes and standardised outcome measures is warranted to establish definitive conclusions regarding the comparative efficacy of CBT versus standard treatments in TMD management.

The COVID-19 epidemic has affected not only people’s daily lives but also the working methods of clinicians, surgical procedures, open/minimally invasive procedures, operating room management, patient and healthcare worker safety, education and training. The main objective of this study was to review selected articles and determine the changes in the general surgery protocols/procedures before and after the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic. The literature was carried out in PubMed-Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus and Google Scholar. The terms utilised for the searches were “SARS-CoV-2”, “Surgery”, “COVID-19”, “Surgical protocol”, “Surgical recommendations” and “before and after”. A total of 236 studies were identified, out of which 41 studies were included for data extraction. Significant changes in all the articles were observed with respect to the surgeries done before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, the number of elective surgeries were considerably fewer in comparison to the pre-pandemic period. Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, hospitals all throughout the world have conducted significantly fewer procedures, particularly elective/non-urgent surgeries.

Chronic orofacial pain (CP) is a persistent and debilitating condition that affects the face, mouth, and jaw and can have a significant impact on an individual’s quality of life by posing problems to eat, speak, and perform everyday activities. By the means of this narrative review, we aim to assess different types of management modalities that exist to combat chronic orofacial pain. Various databases were explored with MeSH keywords of chronic orofacial pain, orofacial pain, and interventions and treatment protocols for eligible articles. After an extensive literature search, it was ascertained that this review identified four major categories of treatment modalities for the management of chronic orofacial pain, namely pharmacological management, psychological management, lifestyle interventions-based management, and current stimulation-based management. Of the four categories discussed, although pharmacological intervention offered the most immediate relief—especially from orofacial pain that was of a sudden, stab-like in nature—psychological management demonstrated a remarkable ability to reduce/alleviate the more serious aspect of chronic orofacial pain and was deemed better in comparison to the rest. Lifestyle-based techniques and current stimulation-based management were of limited use since they tended to focus more on the causal and not the symptomatic aspect of orofacial pain. Many patients with persistent orofacial discomfort can experience notable improvements in their symptoms and general well-being by all the treatment modalities evaluated.

Introduction: Parents' participation is crucial in the dental health intervention of children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Parenting children with ASD is extremely stressful and challenging. Parents and other caregivers have a responsibility to care for and raise children with ASD. Parental perception of the condition, situational adaptation, and attitude towards the issue are significant indicators of how they will respond and eventually adapt to it. Methodology: A comparative, descriptive study was done on parents of 154 autistic children and 235 normal children. An 11-variable questionnaire eliciting various details of socio-psychological factors affecting the utilisation of oral health care was designed and validated. The questionnaire also included parameters regarding barriers to accessing dental services. The dental caries and oral hygiene status of all children were examined using the Basic Oral Health Survey 2013 proforma. Chi-square and independent t-tests were applied to find significant differences between the groups. Results: A greater number of male children (61.0%) were observed among autistic children. Parental perception regarding socio-psychological concerns with raising an autistic child showed significant differences for all variables between the groups except for assistance in the child’s task with 90.2% as against 55% of the parents with non-autistic children. Parents of autistic children were more receptive to the idea of focus group discussion. Decayed teeth were significantly found to be higher in autistic cohorts (2.554 ± 1.616 versus 1.779 ± 1.841). Oral hygiene status was also statistically significant amongst autism-affected children than those who were not at p =0.000. Conclusion: The present study explored various socio-psychological factors of parental perception of autistic children. A better outcome can be suggested when parents gained awareness regarding various strategies and treatment options available for their child's oral health. Furthermore, dental health can be improved by bringing in certain environmental modifications in which the autistic child is groomed.

Background/Objectives: Clinically node-negative (cN0) neck management in cT1–T2 oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma continues to be a subject of controversy. The eighth edition AJCC has incorporated depth of invasion (DOI) as a significant factor in staging and consideration for possible neck dissection. Establishment of accurate DOI thresholds and their clinical relevance is crucial to maximize oncological outcomes with reduced unnecessary morbidity. Methods: A comprehensive analysis of clinical research assessing elective neck dissection (END) techniques in oral cavity cancers classified by DOI in cT1–T2N0 patients was carried out. The included studies reported occult nodal metastasis rates, overall survival, disease-specific survival, disease-free survival, and regional control. Results: With hazard ratios favoring END for overall survival (HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.45–0.92) and disease-free survival (HR 0.45; 95% CI 0.34–0.59), elective neck dissection provided advantages in both survival and regional control. In a national registry, DOI ≥ 5 mm independently raised the risk of nodal failure (HR 2.099; 95% CI 1.346–3.271), while END enhanced neck control in comparison to observation (HR 1.749; 95% CI 1.141–2.680). With ROC-derived cut-offs like 4.59 mm producing positive predictive values for nodal metastasis up to 41.7%, diagnostic thresholds clustered around 4 mm. Conclusions: Under DOI guidance, elective neck dissection consistently showed oncologic benefit, with practical thresholds convergent around 4 mm for sites in the mixed oral cavity and 3 mm for high-risk subsites. The synthesized results confirmed that DOI is the primary determinant of END when combined with histopathologic and subsite-specific risk factors.