Influence of diagnostic adjuncts to the measurement of caries prevalence at different caries thresholds

Objectives: To determine the influence of diagnostic adjuncts (dental brushing and drying) in dental caries diagnosis. To analyse the underestimation levels in epidemiological examinations when compared to traditional dental setting examinations. To evaluate the influence of including noncavitated (NC) carious lesions in the estimation of the disease. Participants: 51, 12‐year‐old children. Interventions/methods: Four epidemiological exams performed in an outdoor setting and one performed in a traditional dental setting (visual‐tactile method associated or not with diagnostic adjuncts). Main outcome measures: DMFS (Decayed, Missing and Filled Surfaces) index, according to the WHO criteria. Results: When compared to exams carried out in a traditional dental setting, the epidemiological examinations showed no significant statistical differences for the DMFS score (p>0.05), presenting underestimation levels lower than 10% (except for the low prevalence caries group in the WHO exam). For the DMFS, previous dental brushing was more relevant than previous dental drying, although drying was the most important resource for NC diagnosis (p