Need of non-operative caries treatment in 16-year-olds from Northern Norway
- 86 Downloads
To assess the prevalence of proximal enamel lesions, the need for non-operative caries treatment and the quality of dental restorations in 869 students aged 16 years from Northern Norway.
All first year upper secondary school students in Tromsø and Balsfjord municipalities were invited to participate in an oral- and general health project (Fit Futures). The attendance rate was 90%, and all subjects born in 1994 (449 males and 420 females) were included in the present study. Dental caries was registered according to a 5-graded scale (1–2 = enamel lesions; 3–5 = dentinal lesions). Scores from 1 to 4 were used to register the quality of restorations (1 = good; 2 = acceptable; 3 = poor; 4 = unacceptable).
Only 6% of the 16-year-olds were completely caries-free. There were 84% of the participants with proximal enamel lesions. A majority of them had either previously restored teeth (35%) or both restored teeth and untreated dentinal caries lesions (34%). When using the D-value of the DMFS-index as a diagnostic criterion, 39% of the participants were in need of restorative treatment. When proximal enamel lesions were included in the diagnosis, the number of participants in need of restorative and/or non-operative caries treatment was 85%. Over 1/3 of the participants presented with at least one restoration below an acceptable quality level.
Dental caries is still a major health problem affecting the total teenage population. A non-operative treatment strategy should be considered relevant in order to reduce the need for restorative treatment.
KeywordsProximal enamel caries Dental caries Non-operative treatment Adolescents Oral health
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
There are no conflicts of interest for any of the authors.
The project was in accordance with the ethical standards of the national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.
- Bader JD, Shugars DA, Bonito AJ. Systematic reviews of selected dental caries diagnostic and management methods. J Dent Educ. 2001b;65(10):960–8.Google Scholar
- Crossner CG, Unell L. A longitudinal study of dental health from the age of 14 to 41. Swed Dent J. 2007;31(2):65–74.Google Scholar
- Gabre P, Birring E, Gahnberg L. A 20-year study of dentists’ and dental hygienists’ assessment of dental caries lesions in bite-wing radiographs. Swed Dent J. 2006;30(1):35–42.Google Scholar
- Hugoson A, Koch G, Göthberg C, et al. Oral health of individuals aged 3–80 years in Jonkoping, Sweden during 30 years (1973–2003). II. Review of clinical and radiographic findings. Swed Dent J. 2005;29(4):139–55.Google Scholar
- Hugoson A, Koch G, Helkimo AN, Lundin S. Caries prevalence and distribution in individuals aged 3–20 years in Jönköping, Sweden, over a 30-year period (1973–2003). Int J Paediatr Dent. 2008;18(1):18–26.Google Scholar
- Jacobsen I, Eriksen H, Espelid I, et al. Prevalence of dental caries among 16-year-olds in Troms County, Northern Norway. Swed Dent J. 2016;40(2):191–201.Google Scholar
- Mjor I, Gordan V. Failure, repair, refurbishing and longevity of restorations. Oper Dent. 2002;27(5):528–34.Google Scholar
- Norderyd O, Koch G, Papias A, et al. Oral health of individuals aged 3–80 years in Jönköping, Sweden during 40 years (1973–2013): II. Review of clinical and radiographic findings. Swed Dent J. 2015;39(2):69–86.Google Scholar
- Pallesen U, van Dijken JW, Halken J, Hallonsten A-L, Höigaard R. A prospective 8-year follow-up of posterior resin composite restorations in permanent teeth of children and adolescents in Public Dental Health Service: reasons for replacement. Clin Oral Investig. 2014;18(3):819–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Raadal M, Espelid I, Crossner C. Non-operativ vs operativ behandling av karies blant barn og unge. Nor Tannlegeforen Tid. 2011;121(1):10–7.Google Scholar
- Widström E, Agustsdottir H, Byrkjeflot L, Pälvärinne R, Christensen L. Systems for provision of oral health care in the Nordic countries. Tandlaegebladet. 2015;119(9):10.Google Scholar