Neuhaus, Klaus W. and Kuehnisch, Jan and Banerjee, Avijit and Martignon, Stefania and Ricketts, David and Schwendicke, Falk and van der Veen, Monique H. and Domejean, Sophie and Fontana, Margherita and Lussi, Adrian and Jablonski-Momeni, Anahita and Mendes, Fausto Medeiros and Douglas, Gail and Schmalz, Gottfried and Campus, Guglielmo and Aps, Johan and Horner, Keith and Opdam, Niek and Huysmans, Marie-Charlotte and Splieth, Christian H. (2024) Organization for Caries Research-European Federation of Conservative Dentistry Consensus Report on Clinical Recommendations for Caries Diagnosis Paper II: Caries Lesion Activity and Progression Assessment. CARIES RESEARCH, 58 (5). pp. 511-520. ISSN 0008-6568, 1421-976X
Full text not available from this repository.Abstract
Introduction: This consensus paper provides recommendations for oral health professionals on why and how to assess caries activity and progression with special respect to the site of a lesion. Methods: An expert panel was nominated by the executive councils of the European Organization for Caries Research (ORCA) and the European Federation of Conservative Dentistry (EFCD). The steering committee built three working groups that were asked to provide recommendations on (1) caries detection and diagnostic methods, (2) caries activity and progression assessment, and (3) obtain individualized caries diagnoses. The experts of work group 2 phrased and agreed on provisional general and specific recommendations on caries lesion activity and progression, based on a review of the current literature. These recommendations were then discussed and refined in a consensus workshop followed by an anonymous Delphi survey to determine the agreement on each recommendation. Results: The expert panel agreed on general (n = 7) and specific recommendations (n = 6). The specific recommendations cover coronal caries on pits and fissures, smooth surfaces, proximal surfaces, as well as root caries and secondary caries/caries adjacent to restorations and sealants. 3/13 recommendations yielded perfect agreement. Conclusion: The most suitable method for lesion activity assessment is the visual-tactile method. No single clinical characteristic is indicative of lesion activity; instead, lesion activity assessment is based on assessing and weighing several clinical signs. The recall intervals for visual and radiographic examination need to be adjusted to the presence of active caries lesions and recent caries progression rates. Modifications should be based on individual patient characteristics.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | ROOT CARIES; CRITERIA; RESTORATIONS; PLAQUE; RELIABILITY; DIAGNODENT; SEVERITY; SURFACES; Diagnosis; Caries; Activity; Progression; Consensus |
| Subjects: | 600 Technology > 610 Medical sciences Medicine |
| Divisions: | Medicine > Lehrstuhl für Zahnerhaltung und Parodontologie |
| Depositing User: | Dr. Gernot Deinzer |
| Date Deposited: | 07 Aug 2025 05:32 |
| Last Modified: | 07 Aug 2025 05:32 |
| URI: | https://pred.uni-regensburg.de/id/eprint/65664 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
