Evidence Hub

Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) focusing on oral symptoms: a questionnaire study

C. Hagberg, B. Berglund, Lena Korpe, Jan Andersson-Norinder

Orthodontics & craniofacial research, 2004

144 participants · 47 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To study the prevalence of oral problems reported among a large group of adults with Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS). Furthermore, to compare proportions of disorders and general psychological well-being with those in a cohort of randomized population-based controls. DESIGN: A questionnaire study. SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: A total of 265 persons with EDS (response rate 77%) and 750 controls (response rate 63%) in a population-based cohort. Sixty persons were excluded from the EDS group (support members, children, undiagnosed EDS) leaving a final study group of 144 adults. The final control group consisted of 331 persons since many had sent back unanswered questionnaires. EXPERIMENTAL VARIABLES: Questions concerning general and oral symptoms, VAS scales for masticatory muscle pain ratings and General Health Questionnaire (GHQ12) questions were included. OUTCOME MEASURE: Proportions of affirmative answers in EDS group and controls were compared. Mean values for ratings on VAS scales. Proportions of GHQ12 scores with a threshold score of four or more. RESULTS: The proportions of affirmative answers for persons with EDS concerning general health problems, oral problems and masticatory muscle symptoms were significantly higher compared with controls. In the EDS group those who had daily pain in the masticatory muscles had significantly higher mean values on the VAS scales compared with those who had pain a few days per month. A GHQ12 score of four or more was…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 144 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free