Assessment of Cervical Abrasion, Dentin Hypersensitivity, and Its Treatment Needs Using the Cervical Abrasion Index of Treatment Needs Probe

Abstract

This study was intended to compare the mean buccolingual measurement of abraded teeth with/without sensitivity. The hypothesis was that the suggested treatment approaches would be in agreement with that of the treatment needs (TN) elicited using the Cervical Abrasion Index of Treatment Needs (CAITN) probe and aid in the development of a prospective CAITN index for clinical/community studies of effective therapeutic measures. Materials and methodsA cross-sectional study was carried out on 30 individuals with a mean age of 48.4±12.54 years, comprising 840 teeth with/without cervical abrasion. The buccolingual measurement of each tooth was recorded using the CAITN probe. The response to air-blast was assessed by a short blast of one-second duration at a distance of 1 cm for each tooth. An endodontist was also asked to indicate the treatment methods used by him for the treatment of abrasions. His opinions regarding the TN were later compared with the data collected by an investigator. ResultsThe mean buccolingual measurements of all the teeth were compared with the dentinal sensitivity using the independent t-test and were statistically highly significant. Furthermore, one-way analysis of variance disclosed that there was a statistically highly significant difference found for all the TN (p<0.01) such as none, preventive, basic, and advanced restorative TN followed by Tukey honestly significant difference post hoc tests for multiple pair-wise comparisons. The running receiver operator characteristic curve discloses the best cut-off value of the buccolingual measurement to predict the various categories of TN of each tooth. As the area under the curve is more close to 1 (noticed in the majority of the teeth in the sample), the model predicts the TN more precisely based on the buccolingual measurements. ConclusionThe present study enables a correct diagnosis of cervical abrasions and determines the various TN with the most appropriate restorative material. These baseline data help to design clinical studies that test relevant treatment and diagnostic strategies.

Influence of preventive remineralizing techniques on surface roughness and volume loss of dentin submitted to erosive and/or abrasive challenges

“…Scientific evidence suggests promising results regarding the use of remineralizing techniques associated with the Er;Cr:YSGG laser, considering that dentin acid resistance was increased ( 3 , 7 - 9 , 11 - 13 , 17 ). Thus, the present study aimed to evaluate preventive remineralizing techniques associated or not with the Er;Cr:YSGG laser in the surface roughness and volume loss of dentin submitted to erosive and/or abrasive challenges.…”

“…Although toothbrushes, toothpastes and brushing techniques are the main players in the etiology of abrasion, it is difficult to reach a definitive conclusion, as other factors can also contribute to the development of injuries ( 6 ). In this context, substantial evidence has revealed new insights to diagnose the early stages of non-carious lesions and allow new preventive approaches to control their progression ( 3 , 7 - 9 ).…”

The Cervical Abrasion Index of Treatment Needs (CAITN) Procedure for Population Groups and Individuals

“…The CAITN index was created using data from prior extensive research [16][17][18][19][20] to inform treatment choices. The authors examined 840 teeth from 30 participants, with a mean age of 48.4 years, and with or without cervical abrasions [16,19].…”

“…A mouth mirror was used for withdrawal and better visibility to avoid gingival puncturing in the buccal and palatal minor region of the gingiva, and the bills of the CAITN test were inserted into the deepest part of the cervically scraped spot. Some portion of the tooth is opposite to the long hub of the tooth to record buccolingual measurements [ 19 , 20 ]. The depth of the cervical abrasion may be calculated by comparing the reading on the CAITN probe scale with the mesiodistal and buccolingual measurements of the affected tooth, all of which are standardized.…”

“…Also, the optimal cutoff value of the buccolingual measurement was obtained, which was then utilized to forecast the different types of TN, by the use of a receiver operating characteristics curve. The area under the curve (AUC) measures how well a model can predict TN from buccolingual data, and a higher AUC indicates a more accurate prediction of TN [ 20 ].…”