caries risk assessment
Recently Published Documents

Introduction: Ability of an individual to taste phenylthiocarbamide (PTC) substance divides the population in tasters and non-tasters. The objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between the taste ability for PTC substance with BMI percentile, skeletal maturity and dental caries experience within taster and non-taster children of age 8-12 years. Hypotheses: Tasting ability for PTC affects the BMI percentile, skeletal maturity and dental caries experience and emerge as a useful caries risk assessment tool. Evaluation of Hypotheses (Materials and Method):  One hundred children of 8-12 years were randomly selected and their taste perception was assessed using PTC sensitivity test. Radiovisiography (RVG) of middle phalanx was obtained to determine the skeletal maturity by using Rajgopal and Kansal modification 2005. Anthropometric measurements were recorded to obtain BMI value and then BMI percentile was calculated using CDC Pediatric growth charts. For dental caries assessment, deft/DMFT scores were recorded. Results: The non-tasters had early skeletal maturation, higher caries experience and higher BMI percentile than the tasters. Conclusion and Clinical Relevance: PTC Sensitivity is a genetically controlled trait showing strong association with dental caries. From the results of this study we can conclude that the genetic ability of tasting PTC affects the BMI percentile, skeletal maturity and dental caries experience. Thus it can emerge as a useful caries risk assessment tool helping in planning the preventive measures and interceptive orthodontics in children.

Abstract Background Caries risk assessment is an essential element for managing and preventing dental caries in children. Individual caries risk assessment can be conducted to evaluate the presence or absence of single factors, or using multivariate models, a combination of factors. The subject has been extensively studied, but no previous research has compared whether a more elaborate and individualized method of caries risk benefits the patient than more straightforward strategies. Thus, this protocol evaluates the efficacy of two risk assessment methods for caries control in children, a simplified method based on caries experience evaluation and a multivariate method described in the literature. Methods This is a randomized, double-blind, controlled, parallel-treatment trial protocol. Two groups will be tested for two forms of caries risk assessment: an individualized and detailed multivariate method based on the guidelines of the Caries Care International 4D and another simplified process, based only on caries experience in primary and/or permanent dentition, considering the presence of decayed, missing and filled teeth using the DMFT/dmft index. Participants will be children aged 8 to 11 years, followed up at 12 and 24 months. The primary outcome will be a composite outcome representing the number of tooth surfaces requiring operative intervention (account variable). In addition, the Shapiro–Wilk normality test and Student's t-test will be performed. A multivariate analysis using negative binomial regression will compare groups in the intention-to-treat population, considering a two-tailed significance level of 5%. Discussion This is the first randomized clinical trial aiming to compare dental caries-related treatment and follow-up based on a detailed, multivariate and individualized assessment of caries risk in school-age children to a simpler risk assessment strategy based on caries experience. This study will define whether there are essential benefits to the patient that justify the choice of one method over the other. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT03969628. Registered on May 31th, 2019.

Oral health in the nation’s evolution, especially in this globalization, an absence of illness in the population plays a key role for a fecund and well established society. Purpose: To find the prevalence of dental caries along-with the risk factors related to them in rural children of District Kasur. Study Design: Cross sectional study. Methodology: Children (n=383) were included in present study through non-probability, convenient sampling technique. Children who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were examined with the examination tools on the dental unit office in the RHC for caries risk using a pre-validated caries risk assessment checklist and Dental Caries detection form. Statistical analysis: Data analyzed by SPSS 21.0v. Results: There are 83 (22%) male and 300 (78%) females in the present study. The respondents of age 7 and over with active and smooth surface caries 383 (100%). The DMFT status for respondents with age 7-10 was 26.4% , age 11-13 was 53.5% , age 14-15 with was 18.8%. Overall dental caries risk in the participants while categorizing them on the basis of high risk i.e. 55.6% , moderate risk i.e. 42% and low risk i.e. 2.3%. Conclusion: This study concluded that caries are present in the form of tooth decay, molars, plaque, lesions, cavities, and gingivitis. The dental problems can be prevented with cleaning teeth at least twice a day with fluoride toothpaste. Key Words: Early Childhood Caries, Risk Assessment, Prevalence and Oral Hygiene.

Introduction: Caries risk assessment (CRA) is essential as the basis for successful management of dental caries. Of the many published CRA tools, four well-known ones are CAMBRA, Cariogram, American Dental Association (ADA), and American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (AAPD) CRAs. The predictive accuracy of CAMBRA and Cariogram CRA tools have been examined in clinical outcomes studies in thousands of patients and the tools are widely used all over the world. The purpose of the present paper is three-fold, namely (1) to briefly review, compare and contrast these four CRA methods, (2) to provide a concise method for CRA introducing a quantitative component to the CAMBRA forms (CAMBRA 123), and (3) to guide the choice of CRA methods that will support caries management decisions.Comparison of Caries Risk Assessment Methods: In the present evaluation, the above-mentioned four CRA methods for ages 0–6 years and 6 years-adult were compared using 26 hypothetical patients (13 per age group). Comparison results show that Cariogram and CAMBRA categorized patients into identical risk categories. Each of the ADA and AAPD tools gave different results than CAMBRA and Cariogram in several comparison examples. CAMBRA 123 gave the same caries risk level results as the Cariogram and the CAMBRA methods for all hypothetical patients for both age groups.Conclusions: Both the Cariogram and the CAMBRA CRA methods are equally useful for identifying the future risk of dental caries. CAMBRA 123 shows promise as an easy-to-use quantitative method for CRA in clinical practice. The health care providers will be the ones to decide which CRA method will allow them to establish individualized, successful caries management therapies and how to combine these for the best care of their patients.