Brad Muir1, Courtney Brown2, Tara Brown3, Dionne Tatlow3, Jeremy Buhay3. 1. Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, 6100 Leslie Street, Toronto, Canada. ; Associate Professor, Faculty of Clinical Education, Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, 6100 Leslie Street, Toronto, Canada. 2. Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, 6100 Leslie Street, Toronto, Canada. ; Sports Sciences Resident, Department of Graduate Studies, Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, 6100 Leslie Street, Toronto, Canada. 3. Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, 6100 Leslie Street, Toronto, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this pilot study was to determine the scientific and process feasibility in an effort to direct future larger trials. METHODS: Scientific Feasibility: Twelve subjects were randomly allocated to an intervention and a control group. The intervention protocol consisted of intraoral vibration therapy on the muscles of mastication bilaterally for a period of 1 minute per muscle. Process Feasibility: Several feasibility outcomes were examined including recruitment and retention rates and consent. RESULTS: Scientific Feasibility: Large effect sizes were generated for both mouth opening and VAS in favour of the intervention group. Process Feasibility: a recruitment ratio of 2.3 respondents to 1 participant was determined, along with a retention to loss ratio of 13:1 and a consent to loss ratio of 12:0. CONCLUSION: Scientific Feasibility: The scientific results should be interpreted with caution due to the small sample sizes employed. The study seems to support the scientific feasibility of a future larger single treatment trial. Process Feasibility: Recruitment and retention rates and ratios seem to support future studies. Utilizing the feasibility results of the current study to direct a future larger multiple treatment trial consistent with other comparable TMD studies however is limited.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this pilot study was to determine the scientific and process feasibility in an effort to direct future larger trials. METHODS: Scientific Feasibility: Twelve subjects were randomly allocated to an intervention and a control group. The intervention protocol consisted of intraoral vibration therapy on the muscles of mastication bilaterally for a period of 1 minute per muscle. Process Feasibility: Several feasibility outcomes were examined including recruitment and retention rates and consent. RESULTS: Scientific Feasibility: Large effect sizes were generated for both mouth opening and VAS in favour of the intervention group. Process Feasibility: a recruitment ratio of 2.3 respondents to 1 participant was determined, along with a retention to loss ratio of 13:1 and a consent to loss ratio of 12:0. CONCLUSION: Scientific Feasibility: The scientific results should be interpreted with caution due to the small sample sizes employed. The study seems to support the scientific feasibility of a future larger single treatment trial. Process Feasibility: Recruitment and retention rates and ratios seem to support future studies. Utilizing the feasibility results of the current study to direct a future larger multiple treatment trial consistent with other comparable TMD studies however is limited.
Authors: Allan Kalamir; Rodney Bonello; Petra Graham; Andrew L Vitiello; Henry Pollard Journal: J Manipulative Physiol Ther Date: 2011-11-10 Impact factor: 1.437
Authors: Lehana Thabane; Jinhui Ma; Rong Chu; Ji Cheng; Afisi Ismaila; Lorena P Rios; Reid Robson; Marroon Thabane; Lora Giangregorio; Charles H Goldsmith Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2010-01-06 Impact factor: 4.615