CariesCare practice guide : consensus on evidence into practice

This CariesCare practice guide is derived from the International Caries Classification and Management System (ICCMS) and provides a structured update for dentists to help them deliver optimal caries care and outcomes for their patients. This '4D cycle' is a practice-building format, which both prevents and controls caries and can engage patients as long-term health partners with their practice. CariesCare International (CCI™) promotes a patient-centred, risk-based approach to caries management designed for dental practice. This comprises a health outcomes-focused system that aims to maintain oral health and preserve tooth structure in the long-term. It guides the dental team through a four-step process (4D system), leading to personalised interventions: 1st D: Determine Caries Risk; 2nd D: Detect lesions, stage their severity and assess their activity status; 3rd D: Decide on the most appropriate care plan for the specific patient at that time; and then, finally, 4th D: Do the preventive and tooth-preserving care which is needed (including risk-appropriate preventive care; control of initial non-cavitated lesions; and conservative restorative treatment of deep dentinal and cavitated caries lesions). CariesCare International has designed this practice-friendly consensus guide to summarise best practice as informed by the best available evidence. Following the guide should also increase patient satisfaction, involvement, wellbeing and value, by being less invasive and more health-focused. For the dentist it should also provide benefits at the professional and practice levels including improved medico-legal protection

Knowledge and Use of Caries Risk Assessment for Adult Patients Croatian Dentists

Svrha rada: Svrha istraživanja bila je evaluirati upotrebu procjene rizika za nastanak karijesa (PRK)kod hrvatskih općih stomatologa i procijeniti njihovo znanje i stajališta o PRK-u. Materijal i postupci: Poveznica za on-line upitnik poslana je na e-adrese 1500 stomatologa u Hrvatskoj. Dobiveni podatcianalizirani su s pomoću deskriptivne statistike, logističke regresije i Chi-kvradrat testa. Rezultati: Od257 ispitanika njih 47 % obavlja PRK rutinski, a samo se 4,5 % pritom koristi specifičnim formularima.Među ispitanicima znatno je varirala važnost različitih čimbenika pri pripremi plana terapije. Nadalje,77 % ispitanika temeljilo je individualnu prevenciju (IPK) karijesa na PRK-u. Veza između PRK i IPK tePRK i plana terapije bila je statistički značajna (p = 0,001). Praktičari koji primjenjuju PRK češće pla-niraju terapiju i provode IPK prema PRK-u. Na uporabu PRK-a nisu utjecali ni specijalizacija, ni iskustvo stomatologa. Zaključci: Velikom dijelu (53 %) hrvatskih općih stomatologa PRK nije dio rutinskeprakse i postoji značajna povezanost između njegove primjene i planiranja terapije te IPK. Potrebno je promicati uporabu PRK-a u svakodnevnoj dentalnoj praksi u Hrvatskoj.Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the usage of caries risk assessment (CRA) by Croatian general practitioners and evaluate their knowledge and attitudes towards CRA. Material and methods: A link to an online questionnaire was sent via e-mail to a sample of 1,500 general dentists in Croatia. The obtained data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, logistic regression analyses and chi-square tests. Results: Of 257 respondents, 47% performed CRA routinely, but only 4.5% of them used a specific CRA form. The significance of different actors in the development of a treat-ment plan varied considerably among respondents. Furthermore, in 77% of the respondents CRA was a basis for planning individual caries prevention (ICP). The association between CRA and ICP, and be-tween CRA and treatment planning was statistically significant (p=0.001). The practitioners doing CRA more often plan their treatment and ICP according to CRA. The use of CRA was not influenced by specialty and dentists’ experience. Conclusions: In a considerable percentage (53%) of Croatian general dentists, CRA is not part of their routine practice, and there is a strong association between the use of CRA and treatment plans and ICP. There is a need to promote the use of CRA in daily dental practice in Croatia

Risk assessment – can we achieve consensus?

Objective The object of this conference paper was to review and discuss caries risk assessment in general practice from the questions i) ‘Why’, ii) ‘When’, and iii) ‘How’. Method Narrative review. Results i) Patient caries risk assessment is the basic component in the decision‐making process for adequate prevention and management of dental caries and for determination of individual recall intervals . ii) Caries risk assessment should always be performed at a child's first dental visit and then regularly throughout life, and especially when social or medical life events are occurring. iii) There are several risk assessment methods and models available for but the evidence for their validity is limited. Although there is no clearly superior method for predicting future caries, the use of structured protocols combining socioeconomy, behavior, general health, diet, oral hygiene routines, clinical data, and salivary tests or computer‐based systems are considered best clinical practice. The accuracy ranges between 60% and 90%, depending on age. Caries risk assessment is more effective in the selection of patients at low risk than those with high caries risk. Conclusion As evidence suggests that past caries experience is far from ideal but the most important single risk component for more caries at all ages, any clinical sign of likely active demineralization on smooth, occlusal, and proximal tooth surfaces should be taken as a signal for the implementation of individually designed preventive and disease management measures.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/96394/1/cdoe12026.pd

Managing carious lesions:consensus recommendations on carious tissue removal

The International Caries Consensus Collaboration undertook a consensus process and here presents clinical recommendations for carious tissue removal and managing cavitated carious lesions, including restoration, based on texture of demineralized dentine. Dentists should manage the disease dental caries and control activity of existing cavitated lesions to preserve hard tissues and retain teeth long-term. Entering the restorative cycle should be avoided as far as possible. Controlling the disease in cavitated carious lesions should be attempted using methods which are aimed at biofilm removal or control first. Only when cavitated carious lesions either are noncleansable or can no longer be sealed are restorative interventions indicated. When a restoration is indicated, the priorities are as follows: preserving healthy and remineralizable tissue, achieving a restorative seal, maintaining pulpal health, and maximizing restoration success. Carious tissue is removed purely to create conditions for long-lasting restorations. Bacterially contaminated or demineralized tissues close to the pulp do not need to be removed. In deeper lesions in teeth with sensible (vital) pulps, preserving pulpal health should be prioritized, while in shallow or moderately deep lesions, restoration longevity becomes more important. For teeth with shallow or moderately deep cavitated lesions, carious tissue removal is performed according toselective removal to firm dentine.In deep cavitated lesions in primary or permanent teeth,selective removal to soft dentineshould be performed, although in permanent teeth,stepwise removalis an option. The evidence and, therefore, these recommendations support less invasive carious lesion management, delaying entry to, and slowing down, the restorative cycle by preserving tooth tissue and retaining teeth long-term.status: publishe

ORCA-EFCD consensus report on clinical recommendation for caries diagnosis. Paper I:caries lesion detection and depth assessment

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present consensus paper was to provide recommendations for clinical practice considering the use of visual examination, dental radiography and adjunct methods for primary caries detection.MATERIALS AND METHODS: The executive councils of the European Organisation for Caries Research (ORCA) and the European Federation of Conservative Dentistry (EFCD) nominated ten experts each to join the expert panel. The steering committee formed three work groups that were asked to provide recommendations on (1) caries detection and diagnostic methods, (2) caries activity assessment and (3) forming individualised caries diagnoses. The experts responsible for "caries detection and diagnostic methods" searched and evaluated the relevant literature, drafted this manuscript and made provisional consensus recommendations. These recommendations were discussed and refined during the structured process in the whole work group. Finally, the agreement for each recommendation was determined using an anonymous Delphi survey.RESULTS: Recommendations (N = 8) were approved and agreed upon by the whole expert panel: visual examination (N = 3), dental radiography (N = 3) and additional diagnostic methods (N = 2). While the quality of evidence was found to be heterogeneous, all recommendations were agreed upon by the expert panel.CONCLUSION: Visual examination is recommended as the first-choice method for the detection and assessment of caries lesions on accessible surfaces. Intraoral radiography, preferably bitewing, is recommended as an additional method. Adjunct, non-ionising radiation methods might also be useful in certain clinical situations.CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The expert panel merged evidence from the scientific literature with practical considerations and provided recommendations for their use in daily dental practice.</p

ORCA-EFCD consensus report on clinical recommendation for caries diagnosis. Paper I:caries lesion detection and depth assessment

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present consensus paper was to provide recommendations for clinical practice considering the use of visual examination, dental radiography and adjunct methods for primary caries detection.MATERIALS AND METHODS: The executive councils of the European Organisation for Caries Research (ORCA) and the European Federation of Conservative Dentistry (EFCD) nominated ten experts each to join the expert panel. The steering committee formed three work groups that were asked to provide recommendations on (1) caries detection and diagnostic methods, (2) caries activity assessment and (3) forming individualised caries diagnoses. The experts responsible for "caries detection and diagnostic methods" searched and evaluated the relevant literature, drafted this manuscript and made provisional consensus recommendations. These recommendations were discussed and refined during the structured process in the whole work group. Finally, the agreement for each recommendation was determined using an anonymous Delphi survey.RESULTS: Recommendations (N = 8) were approved and agreed upon by the whole expert panel: visual examination (N = 3), dental radiography (N = 3) and additional diagnostic methods (N = 2). While the quality of evidence was found to be heterogeneous, all recommendations were agreed upon by the expert panel.CONCLUSION: Visual examination is recommended as the first-choice method for the detection and assessment of caries lesions on accessible surfaces. Intraoral radiography, preferably bitewing, is recommended as an additional method. Adjunct, non-ionising radiation methods might also be useful in certain clinical situations.CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The expert panel merged evidence from the scientific literature with practical considerations and provided recommendations for their use in daily dental practice.</p

How to Intervene in the Caries Process in Older Adults: A Joint ORCA and EFCD Expert Delphi Consensus Statement

Aim: To provide recommendations for dental clinicians for the management of dental caries in older adults with special emphasis on root caries lesions. Methods: A consensus workshop followed by a Delphi consensus process were conducted with an expert panel nominated by ORCA, EFCD, and DGZ boards. Based on a systematic review of the literature, as well as non-systematic literature search, recommendations for clinicians were developed and consented in a two-stage Delphi process. Results: Demographic and epidemiologic changes will significantly increase the need of management of older adults and root caries in the future. Ageing is associated with a decline of intrinsic capacities and an increased risk of general diseases. As oral and systemic health are linked, bidirectional consequences of diseases and interventions need to be considered. Caries prevention and treatment in older adults must respond to the patient’s individual abilities for self-care and cooperation and often involves the support of caregivers. Systemic interventions may involve dietary counselling, oral hygiene instruction, the use of fluoridated toothpastes, and the stimulation of salivary flow. Local interventions to manage root lesions may comprise local biofilm control, application of highly fluoridated toothpastes or varnishes as well as antimicrobial agents. Restorative treatment is often compromised by the accessibility of such root caries lesions as well as the ability of the senior patient to cooperate. If optimum restorative treatment is impossible or inappropriate, longterm stabilization, e.g., by using glass-ionomer cements, and palliative treatments that aim to maintain oral function as long and as well as possible may be the treatment of choice for the individual

Managing carious lesions:consensus recommendations on terminology

published_or_final_versio