Anne Laajala1,2, Pasi Karhatsu3, Paula Pesonen4, Marja-Liisa Laitala5, Ritva Näpänkangas6,3, Aune Raustia6,3, Vuokko Anttonen5,6. 1. Department of Cariology, Endodontology and Pediatric Dentistry, Research Unit of Oral Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oulu, P.O. Box 5281, FI-90014, Oulu, Finland. anne.laajala@oulu.fi. 2. Medical Research Center, Oulu, Oulu University Hospital and University of Oulu, P.O. Box 21, FI-90029, Oulu, Finland. anne.laajala@oulu.fi. 3. Department of Prosthetic Dentistry and Stomatognathic Physiology, Research Unit of Oral Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oulu, P.O. Box 5281, FI-90014, Oulu, Finland. 4. Research Unit of Oral Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oulu, P.O. Box 5281, FI-90014, Oulu, Finland. 5. Department of Cariology, Endodontology and Pediatric Dentistry, Research Unit of Oral Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oulu, P.O. Box 5281, FI-90014, Oulu, Finland. 6. Medical Research Center, Oulu, Oulu University Hospital and University of Oulu, P.O. Box 21, FI-90029, Oulu, Finland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to examine the prevalence of indirect restorations and their association with past caries history and present need for restorative treatment among adults in Northern Finland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study population was a subsample of the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966 (n = 1961). The oral examinations were performed in 2012-2013. Indirect restorations (inlays/onlays and single crowns) were recorded tooth wise. Caries history was described with the sum of decayed, missing, and filled teeth (DMF). Caries was assessed using the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS). The score of 4 was used as the cut off point for visible decay. Present need for restorative treatment was calculated by summing the decayed (D) and fractured (Fr) teeth. Need for restorative treatment was dichotomized to low [(D + Fr) ≤ 1] and high [(D + Fr) > 1]. RESULTS: Altogether, 7.8% of the study population had indirect restorations. The prevalence of indirect restorations did not differ within DMF (p = 0.925), but it was higher among the subjects with a low need for restorative treatment (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Indirect restorations were rare in the adult population and found mainly among the subjects with a low need for restorative treatment. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The results of the study can encourage dentists to consider more often indirect restorations for subjects with a need for restorative treatment.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to examine the prevalence of indirect restorations and their association with past caries history and present need for restorative treatment among adults in Northern Finland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study population was a subsample of the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966 (n = 1961). The oral examinations were performed in 2012-2013. Indirect restorations (inlays/onlays and single crowns) were recorded tooth wise. Caries history was described with the sum of decayed, missing, and filled teeth (DMF). Caries was assessed using the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS). The score of 4 was used as the cut off point for visible decay. Present need for restorative treatment was calculated by summing the decayed (D) and fractured (Fr) teeth. Need for restorative treatment was dichotomized to low [(D + Fr) ≤ 1] and high [(D + Fr) > 1]. RESULTS: Altogether, 7.8% of the study population had indirect restorations. The prevalence of indirect restorations did not differ within DMF (p = 0.925), but it was higher among the subjects with a low need for restorative treatment (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Indirect restorations were rare in the adult population and found mainly among the subjects with a low need for restorative treatment. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The results of the study can encourage dentists to consider more often indirect restorations for subjects with a need for restorative treatment.
Authors: Irena Sailer; Nikolay Alexandrovich Makarov; Daniel Stefan Thoma; Marcel Zwahlen; Bjarni Elvar Pjetursson Journal: Dent Mater Date: 2015-04-02 Impact factor: 5.304