Premium
World Workshop in Oral Medicine VII: Reporting of IMMPACT‐recommended outcome domains in randomized controlled trials of burning mouth syndrome: A systematic review
Author(s) -
Farag Arwa M.,
Albuquerque Rui,
Ariyawardana Anura,
Chmieliauskaite Milda,
Forssell Heli,
NasriHeir Cibele,
Klasser Gary D.,
Sardella Andrea,
Mignogna Michele D.,
Ingram Mark,
Carlson Charles R.,
Miller Craig S.
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
oral diseases
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.953
H-Index - 87
eISSN - 1601-0825
pISSN - 1354-523X
DOI - 10.1111/odi.13053
Subject(s) - randomized controlled trial , burning mouth syndrome , medicine , oral medicine , alternative medicine , dentistry , surgery , pathology
Objectives To determine the frequency of use of the core outcome domains published by the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) in burning mouth syndrome (BMS) randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods This systematic review, conducted as part of the World Workshop on Oral Medicine VII (WWOM VII), was performed by searching the literature for studies published in PubMed, Web of Science, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database/Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar from January 1994 (when the first BMS definition came out) through October 2017. Results A total of 36 RCTs ( n = 2,175 study participants) were included and analyzed. The overall reporting of the IMMPACT core and supplemental outcome domains was low even after the publication of the IMMPACT consensus papers in 2003 and 2005 (mean before IMMPACT consensus publication = 2.6 out of 6; mean after IMMPACT publication = 3.8 out of 6). Use of validated assessment tools recommended by the IMMPACT consensus was scarce (1.9 out of 6). None of the RCTs reviewed cited the IMMPACT consensus papers. Conclusions The underreporting of IMMPACT outcome domains in BMS RCTs is significant. Raising awareness regarding the existence of standardized outcome domains in chronic pain research is essential to ensure more accurate, comparable, and consistent interpretation of RCT findings that can be clinically translatable.