Ten- to 13-year-old children were examined annually for three years to determine the caries activity in the proximal and occlusal surfaces of first permanent molars. Almost every tooth with an unsound (carious or filled) proximal surface also had an unsound occlusal surface. Caries scores in proximal surfaces remained relatively constant and low. The percentage of teeth with occlusal caries or fillings increased throughout the study, even though the teeth had been erupted for seven to ten years by the end of the study. Within the age range studied, the time that teeth were in the mouth had little effect on the vulnerability of occlusal surfaces to caries attack.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine whether the prevalence of dental fluorosis and dental caries had changed in a fluoridated community and a nonfluoridated community since an earlier study conducted in 1986. METHODS: Dental fluorosis and dental caries data were collected on 7- to 14-year-old lifelong residents (n = 1493) of Newburgh and Kingston, NY. RESULTS: Estimated dental fluorosis prevalence rates were 19.6% in Newburgh and 11.7% in Kingston. The greatest disparity in caries scores was observed between poor and nonpoor children in nonfluoridated Kingston. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of dental fluorosis has not declined in Newburgh and Kingston, whereas the prevalence of dental caries has continued to decline.

Three‐year coronal and root caries increments were compared in adults rinsing with either a 0.05% neutral NaF mouthrinse or a placebo mouthrinse. 1006 subjects, initially 20–65 years old (mean age: 39.9 yrs). who resided in fluoride deficient communities used a fluoride or placebo mouthrinse daily in their homes and brushed with an A.D.A. accepted fluoride dentifrice provided by the study. After three years, 731 subjects remained. Compliance was good. There were no significant differences (t‐test, p≤ 0.05) in coronal DMFT, coronal DMFS, root DFT and root DFS between the two groups. In subjects exhibiting root caries at the final examination, the DF root surface increment was 25.1% less in the fluoride mouthrinse users compared to those using the placebo rinse, but this difference was not statistically significant. The only significant difference in the caries increment between the two study groups was found for the mesio‐distal root surfaces of 45–65 year old participants.

Seven hundred and ninety-six adult subjects (mean age, 39.9 years) received visual-tactile examinations for root caries over a three-year period. All subjects were employed or were the spouses of employees and resided in fluoride-deficient communities on Long Island, New York. During the three-year observation period, 81.4 percent of the subjects did not develop root caries. The 18.6 percent who developed root caries averaged 0.8 DFS/year. The subjects' ages and baseline root DFS status were associated with the development of a root DFS increment. The older the patient, especially aged 45 and older, the greater was the risk of developing root lesions or having root fillings placed. Subjects who had a root DFS score at baseline also were more likely to experience a root DFS increment. It is recommended that when designing clinical trials of agents purported to inhibit root caries, preselection criteria for the study population should consider the subjects' ages and past history of root lesions.

Need for professional prophylaxis prior to an acidulated phosphate fluoride (APF) topical fluoride gel-tray application was assessed by comparing 3 years’ caries increments in three groups of school children. The children were initially 10–14 years old and resided in a fluoride-deficient community (F ≤ 0.1 ppm). All received bi-annual APF topical fluoride gel-tray treatments performed in the children’s schools by hygienist-assistant teams using portable equipment. Group I had a hygienist-administered prophylaxis with a fluoride-free prophylaxis paste prior to the fluoride treatment, and served as the positive control. Group II brushed and flossed their teeth under supervision, and group III had no toothcleaning prior to the topical fluoride treatment. Of 1,453 children examined at baseline, 949 were available for the final examination. There were no statistically significant differences between the 3 years’ DMFS or DMFT increments of groups II and III compared to group I. This result indicates that a meticulous, professionally administered prophylaxis may not be necessary before patients are given a topical fluoride treatment.