Advertisement

The American Dental Association Caries Classification System (ADA CCS)

  • Gregory Zeller
  • Douglas A. Young
  • Brian Novy
Chapter

Abstract

The American Dental Association Caries Classification (ADA CCS) is a visual criterion developed to assist clinicians in categorizing all stages of the caries lesions. The criteria consist of 4 scores. The criteria can be used on coronal, root caries and caries around restorations. It categorizes lesions according to severity and activity. It is useful in caries detection and management.

References

  1. 1.
    Young DA, Novy BB, Zeller GG, et al. The American Dental Association Caries Classification System for clinical practice: a report of the American Dental Association Council on Scientific Affairs. J Am Dent Assoc. 2015;146(2):79–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pitts N. “ICDAS”—an International System for Caries Detection and Assessment being developed to facilitate caries epidemiology, research and appropriate clinical management. Community Dent Health. 2004;21(3):193–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pitts N, Ekstrand KR. International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS) and its International Caries Classification and Management System (ICCMS)—methods for staging of the caries process and enabling dentists to manage caries. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2013;41:e41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ismail AI, Sohn W, Tellez M, et al. The International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS): an integrated system for measuring dental caries. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2007;35(3):170–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Young DA, Featherstone JD. Caries management by risk assessment. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2013;41:e1–e12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Takahashi N, Nyvad B. Caries ecology revisited: microbial dynamics and the caries process. Caries Res. 2008;42(6):409–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Takahashi N, Nyvad B. The role of bacteria in the caries process: ecological perspectives. J Dent Res. 2011;90(3):294–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Marsh PD, Percival RS. The oral microflora—friend or foe? Can we decide? Int Dent J. 2006;56(4 Suppl 1):233–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ismail AI, Tellez M, Pitts NB, et al. Caries management pathways to preserve dental tissues and promote oral health. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2013;41(1):e12–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Longbottom CL, Huysmans MC, Pitts NB, Fontana M. Glossary of key terms. Monogr Oral Sci. 2009;21:209–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gonzalez-Cabezas C. The chemistry of caries: remineralization and demineralization events with direct clinical relevance. Dent Clin North Am. 2010;54(3):469–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Featherstone JD. The science and practice of caries prevention. J Am Dent Assoc. 2000;131(7):887–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pitts NB, Rimmer PA. An in vivo comparison of radiographic and directly assessed clinical caries status of posterior approximal surfaces in primary and permanent teeth. Caries Res. 1992;26(2):146–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stookey G. Should a dental explorer be used to probe suspected carious lesions? No—use of an explorer can lead to misdiagnosis and disrupt remineralization. J Am Dent Assoc. 2005;136(11):1527, 1529, 1531.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Anusavice KJ. Present and future approaches for the control of caries. J Dent Educ. 2005;69(5):538–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ekstrand KR, Zero DT, Martignon S, Pitts NB. Lesion activity assessment. Monogr Oral Sci. 2009;21:63–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kidd EA, Ricketts DN, Beighton D. Criteria for caries removal at the enamel-dentine junction: a clinical and microbiological study [see comments]. Br Dent J. 1996;180(8):287–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fontana M, Zero DT. Assessing patients’ caries risk. J Am Dent Assoc. 2006;137(9):1231–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Twetman S, Fontana M. Patient caries risk assessment. Monogr Oral Sci. 2009;21:91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Twetman S, Fontana M, Featherstone J. Risk assessment—can we achieve consensus? Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2013;41:e64–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Domejean S, White JM, Featherstone JD. Validation of the CDA CAMBRA caries risk assessment—a six-year retrospective study. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2011;39(10):709–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Domejean S, Leger S, Rechmann P, White JM, Featherstone JD. How do dental students determine patients’ caries risk level using the caries management by risk assessment (CAMBRA) system? J Dent Educ. 2015;79(3):278–85.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Domejean-Orliaguet S, Gansky SA, Featherstone JD. Caries risk assessment in an educational environment. J Dent Educ. 2006;70(12):1346–54.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Thompson V, Schenkel A, Penugonda B, et al. A pilot study of dentists’ assessment of caries detection and staging systems applied to early caries: PEARL Network findings. Gen Dent. 2016;4(3):20–27.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Davis FD. Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly. 1989;13(3):319–340.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gregory Zeller
    • 1
  • Douglas A. Young
    • 2
  • Brian Novy
    • 3
  1. 1.University of Kentucky College of DentistryLexingtonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Diagnostic SciencesArthur A. Dugoni School of Dentistry, University of the PacificSan FranciscoUSA
  3. 3.Department of General DentistryLoma Linda University School of DentistryLoma LindaUSA

Personalised recommendations