scholarly journals Caries Risk Assessment Item Importance

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
B.W. Chaffee ◽  
J.D.B. Featherstone ◽  
S.A. Gansky ◽  
J. Cheng ◽  
L. Zhan

Caries risk assessment (CRA) is widely recommended for dental caries management. Little is known regarding how practitioners use individual CRA items to determine risk and which individual items independently predict clinical outcomes in children younger than 6 y. The objective of this study was to assess the relative importance of pediatric CRA items in dental providers’ decision making regarding patient risk and in association with clinically evident caries, cross-sectionally and longitudinally. CRA information was abstracted retrospectively from electronic patient records of children initially aged 6 to 72 mo at a university pediatric dentistry clinic ( n = 3,810 baseline; n = 1,315 with follow-up). The 17-item CRA form included caries risk indicators, caries protective items, and clinical indicators. Conditional random forests classification trees were implemented to identify and assign variable importance to CRA items independently associated with baseline high-risk designation, baseline evident tooth decay, and follow-up evident decay. Thirteen individual CRA items, including all clinical indicators and all but 1 risk indicator, were independently and statistically significantly associated with student/resident providers’ caries risk designation. Provider-assigned baseline risk category was strongly associated with follow-up decay, which increased from low (20.4%) to moderate (30.6%) to high/extreme risk patients (68.7%). Of baseline CRA items, before adjustment, 12 were associated with baseline decay and 7 with decay at follow-up; however, in the conditional random forests models, only the clinical indicators (evident decay, dental plaque, and recent restoration placement) and 1 risk indicator (frequent snacking) were independently and statistically significantly associated with future disease, for which baseline evident decay was the strongest predictor. In this predominantly high-risk population under caries-preventive care, more individual CRA items were independently associated with providers’ risk determination than with future caries status. These university dental providers considered many items in decision making regarding patient risk, suggesting that, in turn, these comprehensive CRA forms could also aid individualized care, linking risk assessment to disease management. Knowledge Transfer Statement: Caries risk assessment (CRA) is widely recommended for patient-tailored, prevention-focused caries management. Studies show mixed predictive performance of pediatric CRA instruments, but little is known regarding how information captured in CRA forms guides clinical decision making. This study, in high-caries prevalence 6- to 72-mo-olds, demonstrates the following: 1) most items in a CRA instrument were independently associated with practitioners’ risk designations, 2) practitioners’ risk designations were significantly associated with future disease, and 3) of baseline measures associated with future caries, evident decay was the strongest independent indicator of future caries status. Although current disease (resulting from existing pathological and protective factor imbalance) may sufficiently predict future caries status in populations, other CRA items incorporated during risk categorization could aid practitioners to develop individualized intervention strategies against identified risk factors.

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-61
Author(s):  
Saruta Saengtipbovorn

PurposeThe study aims to test the efficacy of brief-caries risk assessment form with standard caries risk assessment form and to evaluate the application of caries risk assessment following American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (AAPD) between brief and standard caries risk assessment on dental health status among preschool children.Design/methodology/approachBrief-caries risk assessment form was developed. Then, experimental study was conducted in public health center 54 among 70 patients (35 test and 35 control) from January to July 2019. Test group used brief-caries assessment form, and control group used standard form. Both groups received the same caries risk assessment criteria and management protocol from AAPD. At baseline, 3-month and 6-month follow-up, caries risk and dental health status (plaque index, cavitated caries lesion and non-cavitated caries lesion) were assessed. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistic, t-test, chi-square test, Fisher's exact test and repeated measures ANOVA.FindingsPercentage of high caries risk decreased from baseline (93.9%: test and 96.9%: control) to 6-month follow-up (66.7%: test and 65.6%: control) in both groups, with no statistically significant differences between groups. Plaque index, cavitated caries lesion and non-cavitated caries lesion were not statistically significant differences between groups. Brief-caries assessment decreased times/visit from 10-15 minutes to 5 minutes.Originality/valueBrief-caries assessment form decreased caries risk and prevented dental caries as the standard form. Using brief-caries assessment form could save time, is cost-effective and is appropriate for use in public health centers. However, a short follow-up time might have insufficient power to detect the differences between groups.


2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 186-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
LEONOR SÁNCHEZ-PÉREZ ◽  
JORDAN GOLUBOV ◽  
M. ESTHER IRIGOYEN-CAMACHO ◽  
PATRICIA ALFARO MOCTEZUMA ◽  
ENRIQUE ACOSTA-GIO

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
John D. B. Featherstone ◽  
Yasmi O. Crystal ◽  
Pamela Alston ◽  
Benjamin W. Chaffee ◽  
Sophie Doméjean ◽  
...  

Introduction: The purpose of the present paper is to provide step-by-step guidelines for dental healthcare providers to manage dental caries based upon caries risk assessment (CRA) for ages 0–6 years and 6 years through adult. The manuscript reviews and updates the CAMBRA (caries management by risk assessment) system which includes CRA and caries management recommendations that are guided by the assessed risk level.Caries Risk Assessment: CAMBRA CRA tools (CRAs) have been evaluated in several clinical outcomes studies and clinical trials. Updated CAMBRA CRAs for ages 0–6 years and 6 years through adult are provided. These CRAs have been refined by the addition of a quantitative method that will aid the health care provider in determining the caries risk of individuals.Caries Management Based Upon Risk Assessment: Guidelines for individualized patient care are provided based upon the caries risk status, results of clinical exams and responses of the patient to questions in the CRA. These guidelines are based upon successful outcomes documented in several clinical outcomes studies and clinical trials. The paper includes a review of successful caries management procedures for children and adults as previously published, with additional emphasis on correct use of silver diamine fluoride (SDF) for children. The caries management plan for each individual is based upon reducing the caries risk factors and enhancing the protective factors with the additional aid of behavior modification. Beneficially altering the caries balance is coupled with minimal intervention restorative dentistry, if appropriate. These methods are appropriate for the management of dental caries in all patients.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 287
Author(s):  
DeniceC Curtis ◽  
Fernando Ortega ◽  
Scott Eckhart ◽  
Johanna Monar ◽  
Paige Thompson

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
John D. B. Featherstone ◽  
Yasmi O. Crystal ◽  
Pamela Alston ◽  
Benjamin W. Chaffee ◽  
Sophie Doméjean ◽  
...  

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document