Caries risk assessment models in caries prediction

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this research was to assess the efficiency of different multifactor models in caries prediction.

Materials and methods: Data from the questionnaire and objective examination of 109 examinees was entered into the Cariogram, Previser and Caries-Risk Assessment Tool (CAT) multifactor risk assessment models. Caries risk was assessed with the help of all three models for each patient, classifying them as low, medium or high-risk patients. The development of new caries lesions over a period of three years [Decay Missing Filled Tooth (DMFT) increment = difference between Decay Missing Filled Tooth Surface (DMFTS) index at baseline and follow up], provided for examination of the predictive capacity concerning different multifactor models.

Results: The data gathered showed that different multifactor risk assessment models give significantly different results (Friedman test: Chi square = 100.073, p=0.000). Cariogram is the model which identified the majority of examinees as medium risk patients (70%). The other two models were more radical in risk assessment, giving more unfavorable risk -profiles for patients. In only 12% of the patients did the three multifactor models assess the risk in the same way. Previser and CAT gave the same results in 63% of cases - the Wilcoxon test showed that there is no statistically significant difference in caries risk assessment between these two models (Z = -1.805, p=0.071).

Conclusion: Evaluation of three different multifactor caries risk assessment models (Cariogram, PreViser and CAT) showed that only the Cariogram can successfully predict new caries development in 12-year-old Bosnian children.