Systematic review of intervention descriptions in randomised controlled trials with injectable agents for temporomandibular disorder using TIDieR and PEDro scales

The effectiveness of healthcare depends on clinical trials in which the benefits and harms of interventions are assessed and accurately reported. The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of the description of randomised controlled trial (RCT) interventions with injectable substances in painful temporomandibular joint disorder after arthrocentesis. RCTs with patients aged ≥ 18 years old, with temporomandibular disorder that analysed the use of intra-articular substances after arthrocentesis, comparisons with arthrocentesis/other injectable techniques, with joint pain and mandibular movement limitation were included. Non-randomised controlled trials, and RCTs in patients with systemic disorders were excluded. The search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases. The study description quality was evaluated by Template for intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR). The methodological quality was performed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database's PEDro scale. The data were submitted to the Spearman correlation test to evaluate the direction and magnitude of the association between the quality of the intervention description and the methodological quality of the RCTs. A total of 9,793 articles were identified, of which 113 were eligible studies and 19 were included. The mean (SD) ratings by TIDieR = 8 (1.07). Absent items in all RCTs that negatively impacted the TIDieR score were: 'Were there adaptations?', 'Were there modifications?' and 'Assessment of adherence'. Other topics were not satisfactorily described: 'Who performed the intervention?' (52.63%), and 'Where it was performed' (36.84%). There was no correlation between TIDieR and PEDro (r=0.009). RCTs with good methodological quality do not contemplate all the TIDieR items and the scale's proper use would contribute to more detailed reports and more faithful reproduction of therapies in clinical research and practice. Complete reports facilitate the understanding of the evidence obtained and serve as a guide in the reproduction of the research in future studies and in clinical application.