An interactive educational PC-program for caries risk evaluation, the ‘Cariogram’, was developed. It illustrates the interaction between caries related factors and expresses the caries risk graphically. It also expresses a weighted impact of different aetiological factors on the risk. The aim of this paper was to use the Cariogram program on a set of patients, and to compare the outcome of its risk evaluation with those made by dental students and faculty teachers. A questionnaire was given to the participants, containing descriptions of 5 patients with detailed information on 9 factors generally associated with caries. The participants were asked to rank the patients according to their ‘chance to avoid dental caries’ during the coming year. The results were compared with the assessments obtained from the Cariogram and the similarity calculated by group average cluster analysis. Results: 86% of the respondents ranked the patients for caries risk either identical or with only 1 deviation compared to the program. No difference was seen between students and teachers. The cluster analysis identified 5 distinct patterns of ranking the patients with a maximum distance of 0.6 compared to the program. It was concluded that the ‘opinion’ on caries risk of the Cariogram was in agreement with that of the majority of the responders. In addition, the use of the program induced discussions about the relative impact of caries aetiological factors, and it is believed that the Cariogram can serve as one further option in the teaching of caries risk.  

The 'Cariogram', which is an interactive PC-program for caries risk evaluation, illustrates the interaction between caries related factors and expresses the caries risk graphically. It also demonstrates a weighted impact of the different etiological factors on the risk. The aim of this paper was to use the Cariogram program on a set of patients, and to compare the outcome of its risk evaluation with those made by dental hygienists and dentists. A questionnaire, containing the descriptions of five patients with detailed information on nine factors generally associated with caries, was given to the participants. They were asked to rank the patients according to their 'chance to avoid dental caries' during the coming year. The results were compared with the assessments obtained from the Cariogram. Results: 73.5% of the dental hygienists and 78.5% of the dentists ranked the patients for caries risk either identically or with only one deviation when compared to the Cariogram. It was concluded that the 'opinion' of the Cariogram on caries risk was in agreement with that of the majority of the participants. In addition, the Cariogram program induced discussions about the relative impact of etiological factors of caries. It is envisaged that the Cariogram can serve as one further tool in the teaching of caries risk.

The 'Cariogram' is an interactive PC program for caries risk evaluation. It takes into account the interactions between caries-related factors and expresses a graphic assessment of the risk. The aim of this study was to assess the caries risk in schoolchildren using the Cariogram and to evaluate the program by comparing the caries risk assessments with the actual change in DMF. A 2-year prospective study on 446 schoolchildren, 10-11 years old, was conducted. At baseline, data on general health, diet, oral hygiene and use of fluoride were obtained. Saliva analyses included mutans streptococci and lactobacilli counts, buffer capacity and secretion rate. DMFT and DMFS were calculated from records and bitewing radiographs. Scores were entered and caries risk was assessed. Re-examination for caries was done after 2 years. The children were divided into 5 groups according to the assessed caries risk at baseline. Where the Cariogram predicted a 0-20% (high risk), 21-40%, 41-60%, 61-80% and 81-100% (low risk) chance of avoiding new lesions, 8, 35, 42, 73 and 83%, respectively, had no new lesions 2 years later. Logistic regression analyses were carried out. When the Cariogram was included, only two factors, the Cariogram (p < 0.001) and the DMFS at baseline, i.e. past caries experience (p = 0.001), turned out to be significantly associated with caries increment. The Cariogram was the most powerful explanatory variable. When the Cariogram was excluded, lactobacillus count, mutans streptococci, diet intake frequency and DMFS at baseline were significantly associated with caries increment. The Cariogram predicted caries increment more accurately than any included single-factor model. How this finding can be translated into daily practice in the best and most practical way is a matter for future research.

The aim of this study was to evaluate a caries risk assessment computer program, the Cariogram, by comparing the risk assessment of the program with the actual caries increment in a group of elderly individuals over a period of 5 years. The participants were examined and interviewed at baseline about their general health and dietary habits. Data on oral hygiene and use of fluoride were obtained and saliva analyses included mutans streptococci, lactobacilli, buffering capacity, and secretion rate. Based on the baseline recordings, the individuals were divided into 4 risk groups according to the Cariogram. Where the program predicted 0% 20% (high risk), 21%-40%, 41%-60%, and 61%- 100% (low/rather low risk) "chance of avoiding caries", 13, 32, 23, and 48% respectively, had no new DFS over 5 years and 18, 40, 72, and 84%, respectively, had no new lesions at the 5th year. The mean DMFS increment over 5 years was 12.8 in the high/rather high risk group (0% 40% "chance of avoiding caries"), which included 43% of the individuals. In the low/rather low risk group (61%-100% "chance of avoiding caries"), the corresponding value was 5.2%, and 21% of the participants were sorted to this group. The mean DMFS increment for the whole group of elderly individuals was 9.5. In this particular study the Cariogram was able to sort the elderly individuals into risk groups that reflected the actual caries outcome.

The aim of this study was to compare the caries risk profiles of children and elderly, the actual annual caries increment and the impact of some selected caries related factors.The risk profiles were created by a computerised risk assessment program, the Cariogram, which evaluates data and presents the weighted and summarized result as one figure, illustrating the 'percent chance of avoiding caries' in the future. The data used originated from two separate longitudinal studies illustrating the Cariogram's capacity to assess caries risk. One study comprised about 400 children; the other included about 150 elderly. At baseline, information on past caries experience, diet, oral hygiene and use of fluoride was obtained. Saliva analyses included mutans streptococci and lactobacilli, buffering capacity and secretion rate. The caries risk was assessed and after two and five years, respectively, caries was re-evaluated and the incidence was compared with the predictions. Fifty percent of the children, but only two percent of the elderly appeared in the lowest caries risk group. Of the elderly, 26% belonged to the highest caries risk group versus 3 % of the children.The mean DFS increment per year for the total group of children was 0.4 +/- 0.8 (SD) and 1.2 +/- 1.9 for the elderly. Individual factors contributing significantly to the higher risk profiles for the adults were higher plaque scores, higher counts of mutans streptococci and lower buffering capacity. Over all, the risk for caries, as assessed by the Cariogram, was twice as high for the elderly.