ArticleCureus2023
Assessment of Cervical Abrasion, Dentin Hypersensitivity, and Its Treatment Needs Using the Cervical Abrasion Index of Treatment Needs Probe.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective This study was intended to compare the mean buccolingual measurement of abraded teeth with/without sensitivity. The hypothesis was that the suggested treatment approaches would be in agreement with that of the treatment needs (TN) elicited using the Cervical Abrasion Index of Treatment Needs (CAITN) probe and aid in the development of a prospective CAITN index for clinical/community studies of effective therapeutic measures. Materials and methods A cross-sectional study was carried out on 30 individuals with a mean age of 48.4±12.54 years, comprising 840 teeth with/without cervical abrasion. The buccolingual measurement of each tooth was recorded using the CAITN probe. The response to air-blast was assessed by a short blast of one-second duration at a distance of 1 cm for each tooth. An endodontist was also asked to indicate the treatment methods used by him for the treatment of abrasions. His opinions regarding the TN were later compared with the data collected by an investigator. Results The mean buccolingual measurements of all the teeth were compared with the dentinal sensitivity using the independent t-test and were statistically highly significant. Furthermore, one-way analysis of variance disclosed that there was a statistically highly significant difference found for all the TN (p<0.01) such as none, preventive, basic, and advanced restorative TN followed by Tukey honestly significant difference post hoc tests for multiple pair-wise comparisons. The running receiver operator characteristic curve discloses the best cut-off value of the buccolingual measurement to predict the various categories of TN of each tooth. As the area under the curve is more close to 1 (noticed in the majority of the teeth in the sample), the model predicts the TN more precisely based on the buccolingual measurements. Conclusion The present study enables a correct diagnosis of cervical abrasions and determines the various TN with the most appropriate restorative material. These baseline data help to design clinical studies that test relevant treatment and diagnostic strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.