Cargando…

An In Vivo Comparison of Two Diagnostic Methods in Secondary Caries Detection

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the level of agreement between four operators with different levels of experience for two methods of detecting secondary enamel and dentin carious lesions in composite restored teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty teeth of 40 patients with with secondar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hamishaki, Kazem Saber, Chiniforush, Nasim, Monzavi, Abbas, Khazarazifard, Mohammad Javad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4037262/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24910672
_version_ 1782318230305505280
author Hamishaki, Kazem Saber
Chiniforush, Nasim
Monzavi, Abbas
Khazarazifard, Mohammad Javad
author_facet Hamishaki, Kazem Saber
Chiniforush, Nasim
Monzavi, Abbas
Khazarazifard, Mohammad Javad
author_sort Hamishaki, Kazem Saber
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the level of agreement between four operators with different levels of experience for two methods of detecting secondary enamel and dentin carious lesions in composite restored teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty teeth of 40 patients with with secondary carious lesions in the composite resin were selected. The teeth were examined by two methods; visual inspection and a laser fluorescence device (DIAGNO dent pen 2190) by four operators including an undergraduate student, a dentist with 5 years of clinical experience, a general dentist with 12 years of clinical experience and an oral and maxillofacial radiologist. Cohen's kappa statistic was applied in order to assess the agreement between the diagnoses performed by the four operators with each diagnostic method. RESULTS: The diagnosis performed by different operators achieved an excellent agreement with high ICC. CONCLUSION: DIAGNOdent can be a useful device for secondary caries detection in posterior teeth as an adjunct to visual examination.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4037262
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Tehran University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40372622014-06-06 An In Vivo Comparison of Two Diagnostic Methods in Secondary Caries Detection Hamishaki, Kazem Saber Chiniforush, Nasim Monzavi, Abbas Khazarazifard, Mohammad Javad J Dent (Tehran) Original Article OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the level of agreement between four operators with different levels of experience for two methods of detecting secondary enamel and dentin carious lesions in composite restored teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty teeth of 40 patients with with secondary carious lesions in the composite resin were selected. The teeth were examined by two methods; visual inspection and a laser fluorescence device (DIAGNO dent pen 2190) by four operators including an undergraduate student, a dentist with 5 years of clinical experience, a general dentist with 12 years of clinical experience and an oral and maxillofacial radiologist. Cohen's kappa statistic was applied in order to assess the agreement between the diagnoses performed by the four operators with each diagnostic method. RESULTS: The diagnosis performed by different operators achieved an excellent agreement with high ICC. CONCLUSION: DIAGNOdent can be a useful device for secondary caries detection in posterior teeth as an adjunct to visual examination. Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2014-01 2014-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC4037262/ /pubmed/24910672 Text en Copyright © Dental Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0), which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly.
spellingShingle Original Article
Hamishaki, Kazem Saber
Chiniforush, Nasim
Monzavi, Abbas
Khazarazifard, Mohammad Javad
An In Vivo Comparison of Two Diagnostic Methods in Secondary Caries Detection
title An In Vivo Comparison of Two Diagnostic Methods in Secondary Caries Detection
title_full An In Vivo Comparison of Two Diagnostic Methods in Secondary Caries Detection
title_fullStr An In Vivo Comparison of Two Diagnostic Methods in Secondary Caries Detection
title_full_unstemmed An In Vivo Comparison of Two Diagnostic Methods in Secondary Caries Detection
title_short An In Vivo Comparison of Two Diagnostic Methods in Secondary Caries Detection
title_sort in vivo comparison of two diagnostic methods in secondary caries detection
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4037262/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24910672
work_keys_str_mv AT hamishakikazemsaber aninvivocomparisonoftwodiagnosticmethodsinsecondarycariesdetection
AT chiniforushnasim aninvivocomparisonoftwodiagnosticmethodsinsecondarycariesdetection
AT monzaviabbas aninvivocomparisonoftwodiagnosticmethodsinsecondarycariesdetection
AT khazarazifardmohammadjavad aninvivocomparisonoftwodiagnosticmethodsinsecondarycariesdetection
AT hamishakikazemsaber invivocomparisonoftwodiagnosticmethodsinsecondarycariesdetection
AT chiniforushnasim invivocomparisonoftwodiagnosticmethodsinsecondarycariesdetection
AT monzaviabbas invivocomparisonoftwodiagnosticmethodsinsecondarycariesdetection
AT khazarazifardmohammadjavad invivocomparisonoftwodiagnosticmethodsinsecondarycariesdetection