Table 3.
Relative Risk That an Active Caries Lesion Examined at Baseline Changed Its Condition after the Follow-up Compared with an Inactive Caries Lesion
| Relative Riska (95% Confidence Intervals) |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Dental Surface: Activity Status | Regression or Arrestment | Progression to Worse Condition | Progression to C/R/M |
| Noncavitated caries lesions at the baseline | |||
| Occlusal | |||
| Inactive | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Active | 0.87 (0.72, 1.06) | 1.64b (1.10, 2.47) | 2.04b (1.11, 3.74) |
| Smooth | |||
| Inactive | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Active | 0.95 (0.76, 1.17) | 1.60 (0.70, 3.64) | 3.03 (0.69, 13.33) |
| Allc | |||
| Inactive | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Active | 0.96 (0.83, 1.09) | 1.41 (0.98, 2.03) | 1.95b (1.12, 3.40) |
| Cavitations clinically limited to the enamel at the baseline | |||
| Occlusal | |||
| Inactive | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Active | 0.82 (0.42, 1.60) | 1.19 (0.65, 2.19) | 1.54 (0.76, 3.16) |
| Smooth | |||
| Inactive | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Active | 0.89 (0.39, 2.06) | 0.86 (0.22, 3.36) | 0.89 (0.24, 3.31) |
| Allc | |||
| Inactive | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| Active | 0.89 (0.54, 1.47) | 1.09 (0.64, 1.86) | 1.44 (0.78, 2.65) |
The outcomes variables were (1) regression from decayed to sound or no progression, (2) progression to a worse condition, and (3) progression to frankly cavitated caries lesions, restored surfaces, or missed surfaces (i.e., progression to C/R/M).
a
Values adjusted for the number of days after the baseline examination.
b
Statistically significant association through multilevel Poisson regression analysis.
c
It was not possible to calculate the relative risks of the proximal surfaces separately, but these surfaces were included in the calculation considering all surfaces together.