Australian Research Centre for Population Oral Health, Adelaide Dental School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia; Department of Dental Public Health, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Indonesia.
Department of Dental Public Health, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Universitas Airlangga, Indonesia; Faculty of Health Science, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
J Dent. 2018 Oct;77:1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2018.06.013. Epub 2018 Jun 21.
Previous meta-analyses of root caries incidence and increment studies reported different estimates due to the limited number of studies, heterogeneity and variations in studies included. Currently, new publications and approaches to handle heterogeneity are available. This research aims to systematically review and meta-analyse root caries incidence and increment, and use meta-regression to analyse heterogeneity.
PUBMED and EMBASE databases were searched systematically.
Longitudinal studies on root caries incidence and increment, published in English language prior to 2017, were independently checked by two authors. A pooled incidence and increment of decayed/filled root surfaces (DFS) was estimated and meta-regression analysis was performed by length of follow-up (<2 years; 2years; 3-4years and ≥5years) and study type (observational population-based and clinical trial).
Of 737 articles, 20 were included for meta-analysis. The annualised root caries incidence and increment were 18.25%[CI = 13.22%-23.28%] and 0.45[CI = 0.37-0.53] root DFS respectively. Length of follow-up influenced the estimates, but not the study type. The annual root DFS incidence and increment from studies <2years were 32.95%[CI = 29.13%-36.77%] and 0.64[CI = 0.38-0.89] root surfaces respectively. Studies with 5+years follow-up, the annualised root caries incidence and increment were 9.4%[CI = 3.32%-15.48%] and 0.43[CI = 0.21-0.64] root surfaces respectively.
Length of follow-up influenced root caries estimates due to a bias towards relatively healthier older adults retained in the study. Root caries increased over time even among the healthier older adults.
The increase in root caries, even among the healthier older adults, should be considered by both clinicians and healthcare planners/policy makers in their provision of services.
由于研究数量有限、存在异质性以及纳入研究的变化，之前关于根龋发病率和增量的荟萃分析报告了不同的估计值。目前，有新的出版物和处理异质性的方法。本研究旨在系统地综述和荟萃分析根龋的发病率和增量，并使用荟萃回归分析异质性。
系统地检索了 PUBMED 和 EMBASE 数据库。
由两位作者独立检查了 2017 年前发表的关于根龋发病率和增量的纵向研究。估计了已腐烂/已填充根面的累积发病率和增量（DFS），并通过随访时间（<2 年；2 年；3-4 年和≥5 年）和研究类型（观察性人群基础和临床试验）进行了荟萃回归分析。
在 737 篇文章中，有 20 篇文章被纳入荟萃分析。根龋的年化发病率和增量分别为 18.25%[95%CI=13.22%-23.28%]和 0.45[95%CI=0.37-0.53]个根 DFS。随访时间影响了这些估计值，但不影响研究类型。随访时间<2 年的研究中，根 DFS 的年化发病率和增量分别为 32.95%[95%CI=29.13%-36.77%]和 0.64[95%CI=0.38-0.89]个根面。随访时间≥5 年的研究中，年化根龋发病率和增量分别为 9.4%[95%CI=3.32%-15.48%]和 0.43[95%CI=0.21-0.64]个根面。
由于研究中保留的相对更健康的老年人存在偏倚，随访时间影响了根龋的估计值。即使在更健康的老年人中，根龋也会随着时间的推移而增加。
即使在更健康的老年人中，根龋的增加也应该被临床医生和医疗保健规划者/政策制定者在提供服务时考虑到。
