الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 175 |  |  |
| | | from | 175 | | |
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of Low Level Laser Therapy / infrared-led therapy when used with or without a Maxillary Anterior Repositioning Splint in patients diagnosed with Temporomandibular Disorders. Material and methods: Forty patients diagnosed with temporomandibular disorders, particularly anterior disc displacement with reduction, were selected from the prosthetic dental clinic at the Faculty of Dentistry, Mansoura University. Their diagnoses were confirmed using resonance imaging. The patients were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups: group A (n=20): Received Maxillary Anterior Repositioning Splint (MARS) therapy for a conservative duration of three months. This group was further divided into two subgroups: group A-1(n=10): Treatment was proceeded by Infrared Light-Emitting Diode (IR-Led) sessions, conducted for four weeks, twice weekly. group A-2 (n=10): Treatment was proceeded by Low-Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) sessions, conducted for three weeks, twice weekly. group B (n=10): Received IR-Led therapy, which was subdivided into group B-1 (n=10): Treatment was proceeded by MARS while group C (n=10): Received LLLT therapy. Additionally, it was subdivided into group C-1(n=10): Treatment was proceeded by MARS treatment. The treatment protocols were consistent with those mentioned for group A. For evaluation, this study used range of motion assessment and Helkimo Clinical Dysfunction Index (HCDI), reading were taken before treatment and after the documented period of each group. Statistical data analysis was performed (P<.05) Results: group A and its subdivisions demonstrated the highest mean opening after treatment, suggesting the efficacy of the intervention in enhancing VI Maximum Interincisal Opening. Furthermore, there was a notable increase in right/left/protrusive readings post-treatment compared to pre-treatment levels within all studied groups, indicating enhanced lateral and protrusive excursions of the jaw. Additionally, the Helkimo Clinical Dysfunction Index scores showed a statistically significant difference among the studied groups post-treatment, highlighting varying degrees of improvement in clinical dysfunction (p<0.001) Conclusion: We can conclude that group A and its subdivisions showed significant improvement in Maximum Interincisal Opening following treatment, while all treated groups exhibited notable enhancements in right, left, and protrusive excursions, as well as in the Helkimo Clinical Dysfunction Index.