Comparing Methods for Detecting Enamel Defects in Children
Author Information
Author(s): Golkari Ali, Sabokseir Aira, Pakshir Hamid-Reza, Dean M Christopher, Sheiham Aubrey, Watt Richard G
Primary Institution: University College London
Hypothesis
This study aimed to compare photographic and replication methods with the direct clinical examination method for detecting developmental defects of enamel (DDE) in children's permanent incisors.
Conclusion
The photographic method was much more sensitive than direct clinical examination in detecting DDE and was the best of the three methods for epidemiological studies.
Supporting Evidence
- The photographic method detected significantly more subjects with DDE compared to direct examination (P = 0.002).
- The photographic method detected 3.1 times more DDE lesions than the direct examination method.
- The replication method detected 2.3 times more hypoplastic DDE lesions than the direct examination method.
Takeaway
This study looked at different ways to find problems with kids' teeth, and found that taking pictures of the teeth worked best.
Methodology
The study involved 110 children aged 8-10, using direct clinical examination, photographic, and replication methods to assess enamel defects.
Potential Biases
Observer bias may have affected the direct clinical examination results.
Limitations
The study did not test intra-examiner reliability for the direct clinical method and had a response rate of 81.8% for photographs and 66.4% for impressions.
Participant Demographics
Children aged 8-10 years from Shiraz, Iran.
Statistical Information
P-Value
0.002
Statistical Significance
p<0.001
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website