Implant or tooth? - A cost-time analysis of managing "unrestorable" teeth✰.

OBJECTIVES: Retaining and restoring severely compromised teeth with subcrestal defect extensions or removing and replacing them using implant-supported crowns (ISC) remains controversial, and economic analyses comparing both strategies remain scarce. We performed a cost-time analysis, comparing the expenditures for retaining "unrestorable" teeth using forced orthodontic extrusion and restoration (FOE) versus extraction and ISC, in a clinical prospective cohort study. METHODS: Forty-two patients (n = 21 per group) were enrolled from clinical routine at a university into this study. Direct medical and indirect costs (opportunity costs) were assessed for all relevant steps (initial care, active care, restorative care, supportive care) using the private payer's perspective in German healthcare based on a micro-costing approach and/or national fee items. Statistical comparison was performed with Mann-Whitney-U test. RESULTS: Patients were followed up for at least one year after initial treatment (n = 40). The drop-out rate was 5% (n = 2). Total direct medical costs were higher for ISC (median: 3439.05€) than FOE (median: 1601.46€) with p<0.001. We observed a higher number of appointments (p = 0.002) for ISC (median: 14.5) in comparison to FOE (median: 12), while cumulatively, FOE patients spent more time in treatment (median: 402.5 min) in comparison to ISC (median: 250 min) with p<0.001, resulting in comparable opportunity costs for both treatment groups (FOE: 304.50€; ISC: 328.98€). CONCLUSIONS: ISC generated higher costs than FOE. More in-depth and long-term exploration of cost-effectiveness is warranted. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: ISCs were associated with higher initial medical costs and required more appointments than the restoration of severely compromised teeth after FOE. Treatment time was higher for patients with FOE, resulting in similar opportunity costs for both treatment approaches. Future research needs to investigate long-term cost-effectiveness.

Health economic evaluation of forced orthodontic extrusion of extensively damaged teeth: up to 6-year results from a clinical study.

OBJECTIVES: Clinical data on retaining extensively damaged teeth using forced orthodontic extrusion followed by restorative rehabilitation are scarce, and economic evaluations are basically absent. A health economic evaluation of this method was performed based on a clinical study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a convenience sample of individuals recruited from routine care, extensively damaged teeth were orthodontically extruded prior to restoration. Patients were followed up for up to 6 years. The health outcome was tooth retention time. Direct medical, non-medical, and indirect initial and follow-up costs were estimated using the private payer's perspective in German healthcare. Association of initial direct medical treatment costs and cofounding variables was analyzed using generalized linear models. Success and survival were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 35 teeth in 30 patients were followed over a mean ± SD of 49 ± 19 months. Five patients (14%) dropped out during that period. Median initial costs were 1941€ (range: 1284-4392€), median costs for follow-up appointments were 215€ (range: 0-5812€), and median total costs were 2284€ (range: 1453 to 7109€). Endodontic re-treatment and placement of a post had a significant impact on total costs. Three teeth had to be extracted and in three patients orthodontic relapse was observed. The survival and success rates were 91% and 83%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this clinical study, total treatment costs for orthodontic extrusion and subsequent restoration of extensively damaged teeth were considerable. Costs were by large generated initially; endodontic and post-endodontic therapies were main drivers. Costs for retreatments due to complications were limited, as only few complications arose. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The restoration of extensively damaged teeth after forced orthodontic extrusion comes with considerable initial treatment costs, but low follow-up costs. Overall and over the observational period and within German healthcare, costs are below those for tooth replacement using implant-supported crowns. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: DRK S00026697).