Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 2.
1
Attrition scoring technique
Score
Description
0 Wear facets invisible or very small.
1 Wear facets large, but large cusps still present and surface features (crenulations,
noncarious pits) very evident. It is possible to have pinprick-size dentin exposures or
“dots” that should be ignored. This is a quadrant with much enamel.
2 Any cusp in the quadrant area is rounded rather than being clearly defi ned as in 2. The
cusp is becoming obliterated but is not yet worn fl at.
3 Quadrant area is worn fl at (horizontal), but there is no dentin exposure other than a
possible pinprick-size “dot.”
4 Quadrant is fl at, with dentin exposure one fourth of quadrant or less. (Be careful not to
confuse noncarious pits with dentin exposure.)
5 Dentin exposure greater: More than one fourth of quadrant area is involved, but much
enamel is still present. If the quadrant is visualized as having three “sides,” the dentin
patch is still surrounded on all three “sides” by a ring of enamel.
6 Enamel is found on only two “sides” of the quadrant.
7 Enamel on only one “side” (usually outer rim), but the enamel is thick to medium on
this edge.
8 Enamel on only one “side” as in 8, but the enamel is very thin, just a strip. Part of the
“edge” may be worn through at one or more places.
9 No enamel on any part of quadrant: dentin exposure complete. Wear is extended below
the cervicoenamel junction into the root.
Source
: From Scott [
1
]
Table 2.2
Classifi cation of
erosion due to nonindustrial
causes
Class
Type of lesion
I
Superfi cial: enamel only
II
Locallized: <1/3 into dentin
III
Extensive: >1/3 into dentin
Letter Surface denoted
a Labial
b Lingual or palatal
c Occlusal or incisal
d Multisurface
Source
: From Eccles [
2
]
Human tooth wear occurs so slowly that traditionally it has needed months or
years to be measurable. Teaford and Tylenda [
3
] proposed that microscopic
changes in wear patterns on human teeth detected in a matter of days could be used
as indicators of rates of wear. Particularly, they emphasized that the creation of
new wear features on a surface may only be a good indicator of a certain type of
wear (e.g., abrasion) and not others (e.g., erosion). Through their approach, clini-
cians could modify their procedures in response to changes in tooth use.
A system was introduced by Johansson et al. [
4
] for the longitudinal evaluation
of the severity and the rate of tooth wear based upon clinical observations. Five
scales were used for grading the severity and four scales for scoring the progression
