The use of magnification in a preventive approach to caries detection.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to demonstrate the effect of low-powered magnification on the accuracy of caries detection and to compare it to the accuracy of unaided vision.


METHODS
Five dental models were prepared with extracted, unrestored, human permanent premolars, molars, and canines. Dental examinations were undertaken in simulated clinical conditions by seven dentists using both unaided and magnified vision. A true diagnosis was obtained by histologic sectioning, thereby allowing diagnostic accuracy to be calculated.


RESULTS
The sensitivity of diagnosis, representing the percentage of diseased sites found correctly, was significantly greater when magnification was used. There was no statistically significant difference in the specificities, or percentages of correctly identified healthy sites, between magnification and unaided vision.


CONCLUSIONS
Magnification, although not perfect, improved significantly on the accuracy of diagnosis and can therefore be recommended for caries detection.
Forgie
Andrew H
AH
Unit of Clinical Dental Sciences, Dundee Dental Hospital and School, 2 Park Place, Dundee DD1 4HN, Scotland. a.h.forgie"@dundee.ac.uk
Pine
Cynthia M
CM
Pitts
Nigel B
NB
D001641:Bicuspid / Q000473:pathology; D003481:Cuspid / Q000473:pathology; D003731:Dental Caries / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000517:prevention & control; D003743:Dental Enamel / Q000473:pathology; D003804:Dentin / Q000473:pathology; D006801:Humans; D007909:Lenses; D008853:Microscopy; D008963:Molar / Q000473:pathology; D010808:Physical Examination; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D013223:Statistics as Topic; D013997:Time Factors; D014785:Vision, Ocular