Kornberg School of Dentistry, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19140, USA.
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2011 Feb;39(1):61-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2010.00565.x.
The aim of this paper is to evaluate a new comprehensive scoring system for longitudinal studies using the International Caries Detection and Assessment System (ICDAS).
A sample of 638 children were examined in 2002-2003 and again in 2007. Caries was assessed using the ICDAS criteria which assess six clinical stages of dental caries. Based on a transition matrix matching the baseline and follow-up ICDAS scores, we developed transition weights to best describe the progression, regression, or no progression nor regression of dental caries. Differential weights were assigned to transitions involved with noncavitated, cavitated, filled, crowned, or missing lesions. This method [transitional scoring system (TSS)] differentiated biologically plausible reversals from those because of examiner's misclassification. We computed and compared mean dmfs (decayed, missing, and filled tooth surfaces) increment scores including (d(t) mfs) or excluding the noncavitated stage (d(c) mfs) from TSS and another adjustment method proposed by Beck (modified Beck's method). The coefficients of variation (CV) of the two methods were also compared.
Mean d(t) mfs from TSS was slightly higher than that from modified Beck's method. There was no difference in mean d(c) mfs between two methods. The ratios of CV indicated that the CV of TSS was significantly smaller than those from modified Beck's method.
There were differences in caries increment scores between the two methods when we accounted for the transition of noncavitated lesions. The evaluation of CV concluded that TSS was more efficient because it requires less sample size compared with the modified Beck's method to detect a treatment effect. Both methods can be used to compute caries increments for populations with similar distribution of the dmfs scores to the sample used in this study.
本文旨在使用国际龋病检测和评估系统(ICDAS)评估一种新的纵向研究综合评分系统。
本研究选取了 638 名儿童作为研究对象,于 2002-2003 年和 2007 年进行了两次检查。采用 ICDAS 标准评估龋病,该标准评估了龋齿的六个临床阶段。基于与基线和随访 ICDAS 评分相匹配的转移矩阵,我们开发了转移权重,以最佳描述龋齿的进展、消退或既无进展也无消退。为涉及非龋性、龋性、已填充、已冠修复或缺失的病变的转移分配了差异权重。这种方法[过渡评分系统(TSS)]区分了由于检查者分类错误导致的生物学上合理的逆转与其他逆转。我们计算并比较了 TSS 和另一种由 Beck 提出的调整方法(改良 Beck 法)中包含(d(t) mfs)或不包含非龋性阶段(d(c) mfs)的平均 dmfs(龋失补牙面)增量得分。还比较了两种方法的变异系数(CV)。
TSS 的平均 d(t) mfs 略高于改良 Beck 法。两种方法的平均 d(c) mfs 无差异。比值的 CV 表明,TSS 的 CV 明显小于改良 Beck 法。
当我们考虑非龋性病变的转移时,两种方法的龋齿增量得分存在差异。CV 的评估表明,与改良 Beck 法相比,TSS 更有效,因为它需要较少的样本量来检测治疗效果。这两种方法都可以用于计算与本研究样本中 dmfs 得分分布相似的人群的龋齿增量。