Journal of dentistry · 2023
Cost-effectiveness of school-based caries screening using transillumination.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schwendicke Falk, Bombeck Lisa
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: School-based screening for caries lesions usually only employs visual-tactile detection means (standard of care). Near-infrared-light-transillumination (NILT) could be used to support school-based screening and to identify early proximal caries, facilitating referral and appropriate non- or micro-invasive management in dental practice.
METHOD: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of NILT for school-based caries screening. A German mixed-payers' perspective was adopted. A Markov model was used to simulate the consequences of true and false positive and negative detections and the subsequent decisions over the lifetime of initially 12 years old patients. Our health outcome was tooth retention in years. Costs were measured in Euro 2020. Monte-Carlo-microsimulations, univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and the cost-effectiveness-acceptability at different willingness-to-pay-thresholds were quantified.
RESULTS: NILT was minimally more effective (tooth retention for a mean (2.5-97.5%) 56 (53-59) years) and minimally less costly (515 (416-616) Euro) than standard of care (56 (50-59) years; 526 (427-628 Euro)). The ICER was -503 Euro/year, i.e. school-based caries screening using NILT saved money at higher effectiveness in the modelled population. The cost-effectiveness of NILT increased for payers with a willingness-to-pay for additional tooth retention time. The biggest driver of costs were (avoided) tooth replacements later in life.
CONCLUSIONS: NILT-based screening is likely to yield limited effectiveness gains and cost savings in the modelled populations. In countries where regular practice-based screening of children is less common than in Germany, the cost-effectiveness of NILT for school-based caries screening is likely higher.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: NILT-based caries screening in German schools is unlikely to be cost-effective. In countries with different utilization patterns or generally higher caries prevalence and risk, this may differ.
METHOD: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of NILT for school-based caries screening. A German mixed-payers' perspective was adopted. A Markov model was used to simulate the consequences of true and false positive and negative detections and the subsequent decisions over the lifetime of initially 12 years old patients. Our health outcome was tooth retention in years. Costs were measured in Euro 2020. Monte-Carlo-microsimulations, univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and the cost-effectiveness-acceptability at different willingness-to-pay-thresholds were quantified.
RESULTS: NILT was minimally more effective (tooth retention for a mean (2.5-97.5%) 56 (53-59) years) and minimally less costly (515 (416-616) Euro) than standard of care (56 (50-59) years; 526 (427-628 Euro)). The ICER was -503 Euro/year, i.e. school-based caries screening using NILT saved money at higher effectiveness in the modelled population. The cost-effectiveness of NILT increased for payers with a willingness-to-pay for additional tooth retention time. The biggest driver of costs were (avoided) tooth replacements later in life.
CONCLUSIONS: NILT-based screening is likely to yield limited effectiveness gains and cost savings in the modelled populations. In countries where regular practice-based screening of children is less common than in Germany, the cost-effectiveness of NILT for school-based caries screening is likely higher.
CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: NILT-based caries screening in German schools is unlikely to be cost-effective. In countries with different utilization patterns or generally higher caries prevalence and risk, this may differ.