Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the caries risk of patients before orthodontic treatment using Caries Management by Risk Assessment (CAMBRA).

Methods: A dental hygienist conducted interviews and intraoral examinations of patients attending the Orthodontic Department at Asahi University Medical and Dental Center for initial orthodontic consultation. Items related to disease indicators (D), risk factors (R), and protective factors (P) were checked using CAMBRA. Caries risk levels of patients were classified into four categories: low, middle, high, and extreme. Total scores of D, R, and P between the low/middle and high caries risk patients were compared using the Wilcoxon rank sum test. The association between each factor and caries risk in patients classified as low/middle and high was statistically analyzed with Fisher’s exact test (significance level 5%).

Results: The distribution of caries risk levels was 11.8% (low), 1.4% (middle), and 86.8% (high). Factors D and P significantly influenced the results (P < 0.05), while factor R had no impact (P > 0.05). The presence of white spot lesions (D3) and restorative treatment within the past three years (D4) frequently correlated with high caries risk. Conversely, the use of fluoride toothpaste daily (P1, P2) was associated with a lower frequency of high caries risk.

Conclusion: A large percentage of patients were classified as high caries risk. It is necessary to reduce disease indicators (D3, D4) and to improve protective factors (P1, P2).

Purpose: The study aimed to compare the gap formation between dentin and resin composite using optical coherence tomography (OCT) and the leakage test.

Methods: Three cavities were prepared for each bovine tooth (coronal, cervical, and root). Cavities were filled by Scotchbond Universal Plus Adhesive and Filtek Supreme Flowable Restorative. After 24 h storage in water, the interface was analyzed at the bottom of the cavity using OCT. They were then cut and immersed in 50% ammoniacal silver nitrate (AgNO₃) solution and photo-development solution for a leakage test. Next, energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) assessed the cavity bottom interface. Two-dimensional (2D) images of both devices were analyzed to calculate the sealed interface percentage (SI%). The mean SI% values for adhesive were statistically analyzed by multiple comparisons using the Kruskal-Wallis test followed by Dunn's test with Bonferroni correction, with the significance level set at α = 0.05.

Results: No significant differences were observed among the three sites for either OCT (P < 0.05) or EDS (P < 0.05). Significant differences were observed between OCT and EDS at each site (P = 0.005, P < 0.001, P = 0.004, respectively). When comparing OCT and EDS, EDS detected significantly more white lines (lower SI%) in all locations.

Conclusion: The OCT device showed different detection results compared to the conventional EDS-based leakage method. On the other hand, there was no significant difference in the measurements across different sites of the tooth with either method.

Dual-degree dentist-scientists (Doctor of Dental Surgery – Doctor of Philosophy, DDS-PhD, or Doctor of Dental Medicine – Doctor of Philosophy, DMD-PhD) are the essential workforce for fulfilling the research mission of a dental school, uniquely positioned to bridge the gap between clinic and research. The making of a dentist-scientist is a resource-intensive and time-consuming process requiring a long-term institutional commitment and investment. DDS-PhD and certificate – PhD programs are powerful platforms for fostering promising future dentist-scientists. After postdoctoral training, dentist-scientists who wish to embark on a full-time research career typically start as a tenure-track faculty member of a research-intensive university. This article will briefly discuss the career trajectories of dentist-scientists in academic institutions.