Syfte: Att vid Tandvårdshögskolan i Malmö utröna i vilken grad revisionspatienterna följs upp av studenterna, hur studenternas kariesbehandling planeras och utförs, effektiviteten av denna samt överlevnad hos studenternas utförda kompositfyllningar. Material och metod: Studien baseras på analys av patienters arbets- och revisionsblad, ifyllda av studenter på cariologiavdelningen under åren 2015-2018. Resultat: Totalt inkluderades 68 av 225 patienter. Vid första undersökningen hade 32% hög kariesrisk, vilket minskade till 19% vid revisionsundersökning. Patienter med låg kariesrisk ökade från 22% till 32%. Majoriteten av patienterna fick en minskad kariesincidens, i genomsnitt med 0,375 enheter. Vid första undersökningen hade 18% kariesincidens 0, vilket ökade till 68%. Samtliga patienter behandlades med fyllningsterapi och 7% av fyllningarna bedömdes som misslyckade, främst på grund av retentionsförlust. Den vanligaste kariespreventiva åtgärden var fluoridlackning vilket inkluderades i 73% av terapiplanerna. Fluorid- och kostråd utfördes hos 45% av patienter med hög kariesrisk, jämfört med 13% hos patienter med låg kariesrisk. Fluoridlackning och munhygieninstruktioner utfördes i lika stor utsträckning oavsett riskgruppering.Slutsatser: Majoriteten av revisionspatienterna på studentkliniken följdes upp och fick en minskad kariesincidens. Patienterna bedömdes ha en lägre kariesrisk efter utförd behandling. Fluorid- och kostråd ses i större utsträckning hos patienter med riskgruppering medel till hög. Ingen procentuell skillnad kan ses mellan riskgrupperna gällande behandling med fluoridlack och munhygieninstruktioner. Studien påvisar inga tydliga skillnader mellan behandlingsval och patientens kariesincidens efter utförd behandling. 7% av det totala antalet utförda fyllningar bedömdes som misslyckade, främst på grund av retentionsförlust. / Objective: To determine to which degree the recall of patients is executed at Tandvårdshögskolan in Malmö, how the students’ caries treatment is planned and performed, the effectiveness of this and the survival of the students’ composite restorations.Material and methods: The study is based on analysis of patient worksheets and recall sheets, completed by students in the Department of Cariology during the years 2015-2018. Results: A total of 68 out of 225 patients were included. At the first examination, 32% had high caries risk, which decreased to 19% in the recall examination. Patients with low caries risk increased from 22% to 32%. The majority of patients had a reduced caries incidence, averaging 0.375 units. In the first examination, 18% had caries incidence 0, which increased to 68%. All patients were treated with composite restorations and 7% of the restorations were considered unsuccessful, mainly due to loss of retention. The most common caries preventive measure was fluoride varnish, which was included in 73% of the treatment plans. Fluoride and dietary advice were performed in 45% of patients with high caries risk, compared with 13% in patients with low caries risk. Fluoride varnishing and oral hygiene instructions were performed to an equal extent regardless of caries risk.Conclusions: The majority of the patients at the student clinic were followed up and had a reduced caries incidence. Patients were assessed to have a lower caries risk after treatment. Fluoride and dietary advice are seen to a greater extent in patients with medium to high caries risk. No difference can be seen between the risk groups regarding treatment with fluoride varnish and oral hygiene instructions. The study shows no clear differences between treatment choices and the caries incidence of the patient after treatment. 7% of the total number of composite restorations was considered unsuccessful when followed up, mainly due to loss of retention.