ORAL HEALTH EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE PROGRAM
View the CAT printer-friendly / share this CAT
spacer
Title No Evidence to Support Current Recommendation for Use of Radiographic Screening for Caries at Recall Visits
Clinical Question When monitoring my low risk patients oral health, is taking bitewing radiographs every six month better than current recommendations of 18-24 months with respect to monitoring of dental caries .
Clinical Bottom Line There is no conclusive evidence in support of the current recommendation for use of radiographs for caries monitoring at recall visits. Comparative clinical studies are still needed to determine the optimal frequency for use of radiographs for early detection of caries in low-risk persons. (See Comments on the CAT below)
Best Evidence (you may view more info by clicking on the PubMed ID link)
PubMed ID Author / Year Patient Group Study type
(level of evidence)
#1) 10698247Frame/2000Low-risk children, young adults, and older adultsSurvey of dentists & literature review
Key resultsThe majority of dentists surveyed (73% to 79%), recommended annual or semi-annual bite-wing radiograph examination for caries detection in all ages of low-risk patients population. Literature review found no studies comparing different frequencies of bite-wing radiographs for determining the optimal caries screening interval in low-risk patients.
Evidence Search ("Dental Caries"[Mesh] AND "Periodontal Diseases"[Mesh]) AND "Practice Guidelines as Topic"[Mesh]
Comments on
The Evidence
The authors did a survey of practicing general dentists in western New York , and the intervals of preventative measures they would recommend for low-risk children,young adults and older adults. This data was then compared to a review carried out on published, English-language literature for evidence supporting preventive dental interventions. Literature review found no studies comparing different frequencies of dental examinations and bite-wing radiographs to determine the optimal screening interval in low-risk patients and thus they were not able to support or refute the semi-annual or annual examinations recommended by 73% of the general dentists surveyed.
Applicability Applicable to low-risk patients in all age groups
Specialty/Discipline (Public Health) (Oral Medicine/Pathology/Radiology) (General Dentistry) (Pediatric Dentistry) (Restorative Dentistry)
Keywords
ID# 593
Date of submission: 03/25/2010spacer Revised: 08/16/2011
E-mail PattersonCA@livemail.uthscsa.edu
Author Chris Patterson
Co-author(s)
Co-author(s) e-mail
Faculty mentor/Co-author Bennett T. Amaechi, BDS, MSc, PhD
Faculty mentor/Co-author e-mail Amaechi@uthscsa.edu
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?)
post a rationale
None available
spacer
Comments on the CAT
(FOR PRACTICING DENTISTS' and/or FACULTY COMMENTS ON PUBLISHED CATs)
post a comment
by Rebeka Andrade (San Antonio, TX) on 04/20/2012
I searched PubMed for more recent literature on this subject and found a review published in 2001, PubMed ID 11508131. This study supports this CAT because it also does not recommend an I conducted a PubMed search on this topic in April 2012 and found a more recent publication: PubMed ID 20597560 . This publication demonstrated resistance to fluconazole and itraconazole in HIV/AIDS patients, and suggests that further investigation into anti-fungal resistance in treating Candida species in AIDS patients should be performed. optimal” conducted a PubMed search on this topic in April 2012 and found a more recent publication: PubMed ID 20597560. This publication demonstrated resistance to fluconazole and itraconazole in HIV/AIDS patients, and suggests that further investigation into anti-fungal resistance in treating Candida species in AIDS patients should be performed. Screening interval for bite wings in low caries- risk patients. The study suggests that radiographic examinations of low-risk patients should be individually tailored to the patient, rather than be based on set standards.
by Miriam Robins (San Antonio, TX) on 07/20/2011
No more recent research was found on this CATS in PubMed. The original PubMed article 10693247
spacer

Return to Found CATs list