Background: Dental caries is a serious public health problem significantly affecting oral health. Though there have been many advancements in treating dental caries, complete prevention of dental caries is still beyond reach. Several risk factors are associated with caries formation and progression. Previous studies have been conducted on dental caries and the efficiency of diagnosis using subjective and objective methodologies. Hence, this study was conducted to assess the contradictions in results of subjective and objective interpretations. Methods: A descriptive study was carried out in the clinical setting of rural areas near Chengalpattu. Using convenience sampling, 285 samples were collected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria within the age range of 7–20 years. The subjects were selected from the Outpatient Department of Karpaga Vinayaka Institute of Dental Sciences. American Dental Association (ADA) questionnaires were used for subjective caries risk assessment (CRA), unstimulated salivary samples were collected to measure salivary pH for objective CRA, and DMFT (decayed, missing, filled tooth) and def indices were measured for reference. After data collection, statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 22. Chi-square and Pearson correlation tests were performed to find the statistical differences, and a correlation was found between subjective and objective assessment results. Results: In this study, the correlation between objective risk assessment based on salivary pH and actual caries status was slightly better (r=0.159) than other risk assessment methods (r=0.050). Moreover, a negative correlation was found between subjective and objective CRA (r=- 0.062). Conclusion: The study findings show a negative correlation between subjective and objective assessment. Objective CRA using salivary pH was positively correlated with actual caries status.
Read full abstract