This publication describes the history of Minimal Intervention Dentistry (MID) for managing dental caries and presents evidence for various carious lesion detection devices, for preventive measures, for restorative and non-restorative therapies as well as for repairing rather than replacing defective restorations. It is a follow-up to the FDI World Dental Federation publication on MID, of 2000. The dental profession currently is faced with an enormous task of how to manage the high burden of consequences of the caries process amongst the world population. If it is to manage carious lesion development and its progression, it should move away from the ‘surgical’ care approach and fully embrace the MID approach. The chance for MID to be successful is thought to be increased tremendously if dental caries is not considered an infectious but instead a behavioural disease with a bacterial component. Controlling the two main carious lesion development related behaviours, i.e. intake and frequency of fermentable sugars, to not more than five times daily and removing/disturbing dental plaque from all tooth surfaces using an effective fluoridated toothpaste twice daily, are the ingredients for reducing the burden of dental caries in many communities in the world. FDI’s policy of reducing the need for restorative therapy by placing an even greater emphasis on caries prevention than is currently done, is therefore, worth pursuing.

No abstract

Background/aim-Alkali generation by oral bacteria plays a key role in plaque pH homeostasis and may be a major impediment to the development of dental caries. To determine if the capacity of oral samples to produce ammonia from arginine or urea was related to caries experience, the arginine deiminase system (ADS) and urease activity in saliva and dental plaque samples were measured in 45 adult subjects.

Objectives (1) Quantify at which carious lesion depths dentists intervene surgically for cases of varying caries penetration and caries risk; (2) Identify characteristics that are associated with surgical intervention. Methods Dentists in a practice-based research network who reported doing at least some restorative dentistry were surveyed. Dentists were asked to indicate whether they would surgically intervene in a series of cases depicting occlusal caries. Each case included a photograph of an occlusal surface displaying typical characteristics of caries penetration, and a written description of a patient at a specific level of caries risk. Using logistic regression, we analyzed associations of surgical treatment with dentist and practice characteristics, and patient caries risk levels. Results 519 DPBRN practitioner-investigators responded, of whom 63% indicated that they would surgically restore lesions located on inner enamel surfaces, and 90% of lesions located in outer dentin surfaces in a low caries risk individual. Regarding individuals at high caries risk, 77% reported that they would surgically restore inner enamel lesions and 94% reported restoring lesions located on the outer dentin surface. Dentists who did not assess caries risk were more likely to intervene on dentin lesions (p=.004). Practitioner-investigators who were in private practice were significantly more likely to intervene surgically on enamel lesions, compared to dentists from large group practices (p<.001). Conclusion Most dentists chose to provide some treatment to lesions that were within the enamel surface. Decisions to intervene surgically in the caries process differ by caries lesion depth, patient caries risk, assessment of caries risk, type of practice model, and percent of patients who self-pay.

No abstract