一项基于实践的随机对照试验中龋病风险的变化

Q1 Medicine Advances in Dental Research Pub Date : 2018-02-01 DOI:10.1177/0022034517737022
P Rechmann, B W Chaffee, B M T Rechmann, J D B Featherstone
{"title":"一项基于实践的随机对照试验中龋病风险的变化","authors":"P Rechmann,&nbsp;B W Chaffee,&nbsp;B M T Rechmann,&nbsp;J D B Featherstone","doi":"10.1177/0022034517737022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To demonstrate that Caries Management by Risk Assessment (CAMBRA) can be successfully implemented in dental practice, 30 dentists were recruited to perform a 2-y CAMBRA trial. Twenty-one dentists (18 private practices, 3 community clinics) participated in a randomized, controlled, parallel-arm, double-blind clinical trial with individual-level assignment of 460 participants to standard of care (control) versus active CAMBRA treatment (intervention). Control or active antimicrobial and remineralizing agents were dispensed at baseline and 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-mo recall visits according to risk level and assigned treatment arm. Primary outcome measure was dentist-determined caries risk level at recall. Among initially high-risk participants, secondary outcomes were recorded disease indicators. Generalized estimating equations were used to fit log-linear models for each outcome while accounting for repeated measurements. At 24 mo, follow-up rates were 34.3% for high-risk participants (32.1% intervention, 37.1% control) and 44.2% for low-risk participants (38.7% intervention, 49.5% control). Among 242 participants classified as high caries risk at baseline (137 intervention, 105 control), a lower percentage of participants remained at high risk in the intervention group (statistically significant at all time points). At 24 mo, 25% in the intervention group and 54% in the control group remained at high risk ( P = 0.003). Among 192 participants initially classified as low risk (93 intervention, 99 control), most participants remained at low risk. At 24 mo, 89% in the intervention group and 71% in the control group were low caries risk ( P = 0.18). The percentage of initially high-risk participants with recorded disease indicators decreased over time in both intervention and control groups, being always lower for the intervention group (statistically significant at the 12- and 18-mo time point). In this practice-based clinical trial, a significantly greater percentage of high-caries-risk participants were classified at a lower risk level after CAMBRA preventive therapies were provided. Most participants initially assessed at low caries risk stayed at low risk (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01176396).</p>","PeriodicalId":7300,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Dental Research","volume":"29 1","pages":"15-23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0022034517737022","citationCount":"28","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Changes in Caries Risk in a Practice-Based Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"P Rechmann,&nbsp;B W Chaffee,&nbsp;B M T Rechmann,&nbsp;J D B Featherstone\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0022034517737022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>To demonstrate that Caries Management by Risk Assessment (CAMBRA) can be successfully implemented in dental practice, 30 dentists were recruited to perform a 2-y CAMBRA trial. Twenty-one dentists (18 private practices, 3 community clinics) participated in a randomized, controlled, parallel-arm, double-blind clinical trial with individual-level assignment of 460 participants to standard of care (control) versus active CAMBRA treatment (intervention). Control or active antimicrobial and remineralizing agents were dispensed at baseline and 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-mo recall visits according to risk level and assigned treatment arm. Primary outcome measure was dentist-determined caries risk level at recall. Among initially high-risk participants, secondary outcomes were recorded disease indicators. Generalized estimating equations were used to fit log-linear models for each outcome while accounting for repeated measurements. At 24 mo, follow-up rates were 34.3% for high-risk participants (32.1% intervention, 37.1% control) and 44.2% for low-risk participants (38.7% intervention, 49.5% control). Among 242 participants classified as high caries risk at baseline (137 intervention, 105 control), a lower percentage of participants remained at high risk in the intervention group (statistically significant at all time points). At 24 mo, 25% in the intervention group and 54% in the control group remained at high risk ( P = 0.003). Among 192 participants initially classified as low risk (93 intervention, 99 control), most participants remained at low risk. At 24 mo, 89% in the intervention group and 71% in the control group were low caries risk ( P = 0.18). The percentage of initially high-risk participants with recorded disease indicators decreased over time in both intervention and control groups, being always lower for the intervention group (statistically significant at the 12- and 18-mo time point). In this practice-based clinical trial, a significantly greater percentage of high-caries-risk participants were classified at a lower risk level after CAMBRA preventive therapies were provided. Most participants initially assessed at low caries risk stayed at low risk (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01176396).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7300,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Dental Research\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"15-23\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0022034517737022\",\"citationCount\":\"28\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Dental Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034517737022\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Dental Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0022034517737022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 28

摘要

为了证明风险评估龋齿管理(CAMBRA)可以在牙科实践中成功实施,招募了30名牙医进行为期2年的CAMBRA试验。21名牙医(18家私人诊所,3家社区诊所)参加了一项随机、对照、平行组、双盲临床试验,460名参与者被分配到标准治疗组(对照组)和积极CAMBRA治疗组(干预组)。根据风险水平和指定的治疗组,在基线和6、12、18和24个月的召回就诊时分配对照或活性抗菌药物和再矿化药物。主要结局指标是召回时牙医确定的龋齿风险水平。在最初的高风险参与者中,次要结局是记录疾病指标。在考虑重复测量的同时,使用广义估计方程来拟合每个结果的对数线性模型。24个月时,高危组随访率为34.3%(干预组32.1%,对照组37.1%),低危组随访率为44.2%(干预组38.7%,对照组49.5%)。在基线时被分类为高龋风险的242名参与者中(干预组137名,对照组105名),干预组中仍处于高风险的参与者比例较低(在所有时间点均有统计学意义)。24个月时,干预组25%、对照组54%仍处于高危状态(P = 0.003)。在最初被分类为低风险的192名参与者中(干预93名,对照组99名),大多数参与者仍然处于低风险状态。24个月时,干预组89%和对照组71%为低龋风险(P = 0.18)。在干预组和对照组中,记录疾病指标的最初高风险参与者的百分比随着时间的推移而下降,干预组始终较低(在12个月和18个月时间点具有统计学意义)。在这项以实践为基础的临床试验中,在提供CAMBRA预防治疗后,更高比例的高龋风险参与者被归为低风险水平。大多数最初评估为低龋风险的参与者保持在低风险(ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01176396)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Changes in Caries Risk in a Practice-Based Randomized Controlled Trial.

To demonstrate that Caries Management by Risk Assessment (CAMBRA) can be successfully implemented in dental practice, 30 dentists were recruited to perform a 2-y CAMBRA trial. Twenty-one dentists (18 private practices, 3 community clinics) participated in a randomized, controlled, parallel-arm, double-blind clinical trial with individual-level assignment of 460 participants to standard of care (control) versus active CAMBRA treatment (intervention). Control or active antimicrobial and remineralizing agents were dispensed at baseline and 6-, 12-, 18-, and 24-mo recall visits according to risk level and assigned treatment arm. Primary outcome measure was dentist-determined caries risk level at recall. Among initially high-risk participants, secondary outcomes were recorded disease indicators. Generalized estimating equations were used to fit log-linear models for each outcome while accounting for repeated measurements. At 24 mo, follow-up rates were 34.3% for high-risk participants (32.1% intervention, 37.1% control) and 44.2% for low-risk participants (38.7% intervention, 49.5% control). Among 242 participants classified as high caries risk at baseline (137 intervention, 105 control), a lower percentage of participants remained at high risk in the intervention group (statistically significant at all time points). At 24 mo, 25% in the intervention group and 54% in the control group remained at high risk ( P = 0.003). Among 192 participants initially classified as low risk (93 intervention, 99 control), most participants remained at low risk. At 24 mo, 89% in the intervention group and 71% in the control group were low caries risk ( P = 0.18). The percentage of initially high-risk participants with recorded disease indicators decreased over time in both intervention and control groups, being always lower for the intervention group (statistically significant at the 12- and 18-mo time point). In this practice-based clinical trial, a significantly greater percentage of high-caries-risk participants were classified at a lower risk level after CAMBRA preventive therapies were provided. Most participants initially assessed at low caries risk stayed at low risk (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01176396).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Advances in Dental Research
Advances in Dental Research Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Women in Dental Clinical and Translational Research. Geroscience: Aging and Oral Health Research. Commentary: Challenges and Opportunities for Women in Dental Research Then and Now—A Look Inside the Lives of 11 Women Presidents of the IADR Women Recipients of IADR Distinguished Scientist Awards
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1