Comparison of caries lesion detection methods in epidemiological surveys: CAST, ICDAS and DMF

39Citations
Citations of this article
125Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Although dental caries is a globally widespread disease, there is no consensus regarding the method that should be used for their detection. In recent decades, a variety of new methods have been proposed for measuring caries in a population. Three caries detection methods, the decayed, missing and filled (DMF) index, the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) and the Caries Assessment Spectrum and Treatment (CAST), were compared to provide information to guide future method choices. Methods: This was a descriptive, cross-sectional study in which three methods were used to measure caries in students, staff and their dependents at UNEB (State University of Bahia), Salvador, Brazil. We compared the mean application time of each method and the frequencies obtained by each method using the following indicators: the most severe caries lesion per individual; the mean number of missing, filled and decayed teeth; and the disease extent. Results: The mean time taken to apply the DMF was 3.8 min; for ICDAS, it took 8.9 min, and for CAST, 4.7 min. When calculating the indicator the most severe caries lesion per individual, the prevalence rates were as follows: 28.1% for DMF, 84.0% for ICDAS and 75.0% for CAST. The mean numbers of decayed, missing and filled teeth were 6.0 according to the DMF, 6.2 according to ICDAS and 5.9 according to CAST. When the disease extension indicator was used, the following percentages of teeth were affected by caries: DMF 22.12%, ICDAS 49.11% and CAST 33.2%. Conclusions: The DMF underestimated the occurrence of caries lesions in individuals but was the fastest method to apply. ICDAS obtained detailed information regarding lesion severity, but it was a time-consuming method and difficult to analyse. CAST described disease distributions very well and identified lesion severities and preventive and curative needs in the examined group, and the time required to apply CAST was similar to that of the DMF.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Castro, A. L. S., Vianna, M. I. P., & Mendes, C. M. C. (2018). Comparison of caries lesion detection methods in epidemiological surveys: CAST, ICDAS and DMF. BMC Oral Health, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-018-0583-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free