Non-operative anti-caries agents and dental caries increment among adults at high caries risk: a retrospective cohort study

BMC Oral Health

John DB Featherstone²  Jing Cheng¹  Benjamin W. Chaffee¹ 

[1] Center to Address Disparities in Children’s Oral Health, UCSF School of Dentistry, 3333 California Street, Suite 495, San Francisco 94143-1361, CA, USA;UCSF School of Dentistry, 513 Parnassus Ave, Room S630, San Francisco 94143-0430, CA, USA

关键词: Health outcomes research;    Longitudinal studies;    Caries management;    Epidemiology;    Dental caries;   

Others  :  1226326
DOI  :  10.1186/s12903-015-0097-4

 received in 2015-02-04, accepted in 2015-09-16,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

Consensus guidelines support non-operative preventives for dental caries management; yet, their use in practice is far from universal. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of non-operative anti-caries agents in caries prevention among high caries risk adults at a university clinic where risk-based caries management is emphasized.

Methods

This retrospective observational study drew data from the electronic patient records of non-edentulous adult patients deemed to be at high risk for dental caries during baseline oral evaluations that were completed between July 1, 2007 and December 31, 2012 at a dental university in the United States. We calculated and compared adjusted mean estimates for the number of new decayed or restored teeth (DFT increment) from baseline to the next completed oral evaluation (N = 2,724 patients with follow-up) across three categories of delivery of non-operative anti-caries agents (e.g., high-concentration fluoride toothpaste, chlorhexidine rinse, xylitol products): never, at a single appointment, or at ≥2 appointments ≥4 weeks apart. Estimates were adjusted for patient and provider characteristics, baseline dental status, losses-to-follow-up, and follow-up time.

Results

Approximately half the patients did not receive any form of non-operative anti-caries agent. Most that received anti-caries agents were given more than one type of product in combination. One-time delivery of anti-caries agents was associated with a similar DFT increment as receiving no such therapy (difference in increment: -0.04; 95 % CI: -0.28, 0.21). However, repeated, spaced delivery of anti-caries agents was associated with approximately one decayed or restored tooth prevented over 18 months for every three patients treated (difference in increment: -0.35; 95 % CI: -0.65, -0.08).

Conclusions

These results lend evidence that repeatedly receiving anti-caries agents can reduce tooth decay among high-risk patients engaged in regular dental care.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Chaffee et al.

【 图 表 】

Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Diagnosis and Management of Dental Caries Throughout Life. NIH Consensus Statement March 26–28 2001; 18 (1): 1–24. 2001. http://consensus.nih.gov/2001/2001DentalCaries115html.htm. Accessed 13 Jan 2015.
• [2]Fellows JL, Gordan VV, Gilbert GH, Rindal DB, Qvist V, Litaker MS et al.. Dentist and practice characteristics associated with restorative treatment of enamel caries in permanent teeth: multiple-regression modeling of observational clinical data from the National Dental PBRN. Am J Dent. 2014; 27:91-9.
• [3]Gomez J, Ellwood RP, Martignon S, Pretty IA. Dentists’ perspectives on caries-related treatment decisions. Community Dent Health. 2014; 31:91-8.
• [4]Kakudate N, Sumida F, Matsumoto Y, Yokoyama Y, Gilbert GH, Gordan VV. Patient age and dentists’ decisions about occlusal caries treatment thresholds. Oper Dent. 2014; 39:473-80.
• [5]Fontana M, Zero DT. Assessing patients’ caries risk. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006; 137:1231-9.
• [6]Featherstone JD, Doméjean-Orliaguet S, Jenson L, Wolff M, Young DA. Caries risk assessment in practice for age 6 through adult. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2007; 35:703-7.
• [7]Evans RW, Dennison PJ. The caries management system: an evidence-based preventive strategy for dental practitioners. Application for children and adolescents. Aust Dent J. 2009; 54:381-9.
• [8]Wright JT. Current evidence for remineralizing therapeutics in caries management. J Dent Hyg. 2012; 86:35-6.
• [9]Hallett KB. The application of caries risk assessment in minimum intervention dentistry. Aust Dent J. 2013; 58 Suppl 1:26-34.
• [10]Jenson L, Budenz AW, Featherstone JD, Ramos-Gomez FJ, Spolsky VW, Young DA. Clinical protocols for caries management by risk assessment. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2007; 35:714-23.
• [11]Featherstone JD, White JM, Hoover CI, Rapozo-Hilo M, Weintraub JA, Wilson RS et al.. A randomized clinical trial of anticaries therapies targeted according to risk assessment (caries management by risk assessment). Caries Res. 2012; 46:118-29.
• [12]Kaelber DC, Jha AK, Johnston D, Middleton B, Bates DW. A research agenda for personal health records (PHRs). J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2008; 15:729-36.
• [13]Liu K, Acharya A, Alai S, Schleyer TK. Using electronic dental record data for research: a data-mapping study. J Dent Res. 2013; 92 Suppl 7:90S-6S.
• [14]Söderström U, Johansson I, Sunnegårdh-Grönberg K. A retrospective analysis of caries treatment and development in relation to assessed caries risk in an adult population in Sweden. BMC Oral Health. 2014; 14:126. BioMed Central Full Text
• [15]Rindal DB, Rush WA, Perrin NA, Maupomé G, Bader JD. Outcomes associated with dentists’ risk assessment. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2006; 34:381-6.
• [16]Young DA, Featherstone JD, Roth JR. Curing the silent epidemic: caries management in the 21st century and beyond. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2007; 35:681-5.
• [17]Doméjean S, White JM, Featherstone JD. Validation of the CDA CAMBRA caries risk assessment--a six-year retrospective study. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2011; 39:709-15.
• [18]Gao X, Di Wu I, Lo EC, Chu CH, Hsu CY, Wong MC. Validity of caries risk assessment programmes in preschool children. J Dent. 2013; 41:787-95.
• [19]Vansteelandt S, Keiding N. Invited Commentary: G-computation – lost in translation? Am J Epidemiol. 2011; 173:739-42.
• [20]Ahern J, Hubbard A, Galea S. Estimating the effects of potential public health interventions on population disease burden: a step-by-step illustration of causal inference methods. Am J Epidemiol. 2009; 169:1140-7.
• [21]Snowden JM, Rose S, Mortimer KM. Implementation of G-computation on a simulated data set: demonstration of a causal inference technique. Am J Epidemiol. 2011; 173:731-8.
• [22]Funk MJ, Westreich D, Wiesen C, Sturmer T, Brookhart MA, Davidian M. Doubly robust estimation of causal effects. Am J Epidemiol. 2011; 173:761-7.
• [23]von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP et al.. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. PLoS Med. 2007; 4:e296.
• [24]Slade GD, Bailie RS, Roberts-Thomson K, Leach AJ, Raye I, Endean C et al.. Effect of health promotion and fluoride varnish on dental caries among Australian Aboriginal children: results from a community-randomized controlled trial. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2011; 39:29-43.
• [25]Cheng J, Chaffee BW, Cheng NF, Gansky SA, Featherstone JD. Understanding treatment effect mechanisms of the CAMBRA randomized trial in reducing caries increment. J Dent Res. 2015; 94:44-51.
• [26]Kahn MG, Kaplan D, Sokol RJ, DiLaura RP. Configuration challenges: implementing translational research policies in electronic medical records. Acad Med. 2007; 82:661-9.
• [27]Taubman SL, Robins JM, Mittleman MA, Hernan MA. Intervening on risk factors for coronary heart disease: an application of the parametric g-formula. Int J Epidemiol. 2009; 38:1599-611.
• [28]Westreich D, Cole SR, Young JG, Palella F, Tien PC, Kingsley L et al.. The parametric g-formula to estimate the effect of highly active antiretroviral therapy on incident AIDS or death. Stat Med. 2012; 31:2000-9.