Developing an Australian utility value set for the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale-4D (ECOHIS-4D) using a discrete choice experiment.

PURPOSE: Preference-based quality of life measures (PBMs) are used to generate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) in economic evaluations. A PBM consists of (1) a health state classification system and (2) a utility value set that allows the instrument responses to be converted to QALYs. A new, oral health-specific classification system, the Early Childhood Oral Health Impact Scale-4D (ECOHIS-4D) has recently been developed. The aim of this study was to generate an Australian utility value set for the ECOHIS-4D. METHODS: A discrete choice experiment with duration (DCETTO) was used as the preference elicitation technique. An online survey was administered to a representative sample of Australian adults over 18 years. Respondents were given 14 choice tasks (10 tasks from the DCE design of 50 choice sets blocked into five blocks, 2 practice tasks, a repeated and a dominant task). Data were analyzed using the conditional logit model. RESULTS: A total of 1201 respondents from the Australian general population completed the survey. Of them, 69% (n = 829) perceived their oral health status to be good, very good, or excellent. The estimated coefficients from the conditional logit models were in the expected directions and were statistically significant (p < 0.001). The utility values for health states defined by the ECOHIS-4D ranged from 0.0376 to 1.0000. CONCLUSIONS: This newly developed utility value set will enable the calculation of utility values for economic evaluations of interventions related to oral diseases such as dental caries among young children. This will facilitate more effective resource allocation for oral health services.

Developing an Australian utility value set for MacNew-7D health states.

BACKGROUND: A new preference-based measure (MacNew-7D) has recently been developed to allow condition-specific data to be used to capture the quality of life in health economic evaluations in cardiology; however, a general population value set has not yet been developed. This study developed a population utility value set for the MacNew-7D heart disease-specific instrument. METHODS: The discrete choice experiments (DCE) technique was chosen as the preference-elicitation method. The DCE asked respondents to compare two options and to state their preferences. The survey was conducted using an online panel of respondents, with quota sampling using age groups, sex and jurisdictions to achieve representativeness of the Australian population. The total design consisted of 200 choice sets, of which each respondent answered eight. Additionally, each respondent answered two quality control choice sets. The best-fitting models were selected on the basis of consistency, parsimony, and goodness of fit. RESULTS: In total, 1903 respondents were included in the analyses. The MacNew-7D utility value set ranged from -0.4456 to 1.000 for health states defined by the classification system. The best-fitting model retained all levels for five dimensions and collapsed one adjacent level for the other two dimensions. Findings were robust to sensitivity analyses related to the inclusion or exclusion of dominancy and repeat tasks. CONCLUSION: Findings indicated that the MacNew-7D utility value set is likely suitable for estimating quality-adjusted life years derived from the MacNew heart disease health-related quality-of-life questionnaire. This value set was derived from an Australian population-based sample and may not be generalisable to dissimilar populations.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of paediatric mental health interventions: a systematic review of model-based economic evaluations.

Mental health disorders among children and youth are causing significant burden on health care systems. Hence, identifying cost-effective interventions is important for effective mental health care allocation. Although model-based economic evaluations are an essential component of assessing cost-effectiveness, evidence are limited in the context of child and youth mental health care. The objective was to systematically review the model-based economic evaluations of mental health interventions for children and youth.MethodsFour databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Web of Science) were searched using appropriate search terms to retrieve model-based economic evaluations of mental health interventions for children and youth. The reporting quality of the included studies were appraised using the Consolidated health economic evaluation reporting standards (CHEERS) checklist.ResultsThe database search yielded 1921 records. Of the 12 selected for review, 66% were published after year 2015. Most of the studies were related to anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder. There were eight cost-utility studies, three cost-effectiveness studies, and one study using both forms of analysis. Six studies used Markov models, three used decision trees, and three studies used both types of models. However, the model structure, health states, time horizon, and economic perspective showed wide variation. The reporting quality of the included studies varied from 91 to 96%.ConclusionModel based mental health economic evaluations among children and youth are increasingly being reported in recent research. The included studies used Markov models and decision trees, either alone or in combination, and the majority of the articles were of good reporting quality.

Development of a classification (descriptive) system for a preference-based quality of life measure for dental caries (dental caries utility index) among adolescents.

OBJECTIVES: Preference-based quality-of-life measures (PBMs) have been developed in many clinical areas to aid estimation of more accurate utility values for economic evaluations. Existing oral health-related quality-of-life (OHRQoL) instruments are non-PBM and hence, cannot be used to generate utility values. The objective of this study was to develop a classification system for a new PBM (dental caries utility index-DCUI) for the most prevalent childhood oral health condition: dental caries. METHODS: Possible domains and items to be included in the classification system were identified based on the reviewing available pediatric non-PBM OHRQoL instruments, studies eliciting utility values for oral health outcomes and clinical dentistry textbooks and based on the findings, a draft classification system was developed. To refine the draft classification system, semi-structured interviews were conducted among a convenience sample of 15 12-17-year-old adolescents who had experience with dental caries. The classification system was further refined and validated by a group of dental experts, using a modified Delphi technique. RESULTS: The classification system comprised five items (pain/discomfort, difficulty in eating food/drinking, worried, ability to participate in activities, and appearance) and each item had a four-level response scale. CONCLUSION: The classification system developed herein is considered an amenable tool for the subsequent development of a new PBM for dental caries. Once the scoring algorithm is completed, the classification system can be used to incorporate economic evaluations of dental caries health interventions.

Valuation study for a preference-based quality of life measure for dental caries (Dental Caries Utility Index - DCUI) among Australian adolescents - study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: A new health state classification system has been developed for dental caries - Dental Caries Utility Index (DCUI) to facilitate the assessment of oral health interventions in the cost-utility analysis (CUA). This paper reports the protocol for a valuation study, which aims to generate a preference-based algorithm for the classification system for the DCUI. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) will be conducted to value health states generated by the DCUI classification system and preferences for these health states will be modelled to develop a utility algorithm. DCEs produce utility values on a latent scale and these values will be anchored into the full health-dead scale to calculate the quality-adjusted life years in CUA. There is no previous evidence for the most suitable anchoring method for dental caries health state valuation. Hence, we will first conduct pilot studies with two anchoring approaches; DCE including duration attribute and DCE anchoring to worst heath state in Visual Analogue Scale. Based on the pilot studies, the most suitable anchoring method among two approaches will be used in the main valuation survey, which will be conducted as an online survey among a representative sample of 2000 adults from the Australian general population. Participants will be asked to complete a set of DCE choice tasks along with anchoring tasks, basic social-demographic questions, DCUI, a generic preference-based measure and oral health quality of life instrument. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this study was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee, Griffith University (reference number HREC/2019/550). The generated algorithm will facilitate the use of the new dental caries preference-based measure in economic evaluations of oral health interventions. The results will be disseminated through journal articles and professional conferences.

A scoping review of cost-effectiveness analyses of school-based interventions for caries.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to: identify the evidence on cost-effectiveness of school-based interventions for caries prevention globally up to 2019; summarize key characteristics of interventions applied within this setting; summarize the reporting quality of previous studies; and to identify and analyse knowledge gaps. METHODS: A scoping review of published literature on the cost-effectiveness of school-based interventions to prevent child tooth decay was conducted. A search in Medline, Cinahl and Embase was performed with no date restriction. Reporting quality of the included studies was assessed against Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. RESULTS: Of the 738 records identified in the initial search, 15 studies met the pre-specified inclusion criteria. The majority were published after 2011 (n = 9,) and applied to high-income countries (n = 12). Nearly 80% of the studies assessed the cost-effectiveness of the interventions based on topical fluoride therapies and fissure sealants at school premises. Although, the outcome measures differed across the studies, almost all the caries preventive interventions were cost-saving or cost-effective when compared with usual care. Compliance with the CHEERS checklist differed. CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence to suggest that school-based caries preventive interventions are cost-effective, and in some cases cost-saving. Further evidence is required from low- to middle-income countries to confirm the generalizability of these findings. Future studies should consider adopting Quality Adjusted Life Years as a generic outcome measure that would enable the cost-effectiveness findings to be compared across different types of interventions and diseases. Improved standardization and quality of reporting are also required.

Pediatric Quality of Life Instruments in Oral Health Research: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the generic or disease-specific pediatric quality of life (QoL) instruments used in oral health research among children and adolescents and to provide an overview of these QoL instruments. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed with multiple databases to identify the pediatric QoL instruments used in oral health research. RESULTS: The literature search yielded 872 records; from these, 16 pediatric QoL instruments were identified that had been used among children and adolescents in oral health research. Of these, 11 were oral health-specific QoL instruments and five were generic instruments. Of the 11 oral health-specific QoL instruments, none were multiattribute utility instruments (MAUI), whereas of the five generic instruments, two (Child Health Utility 9D index and EuroQoL-5D youth) were classified as an MAUI. Except for one, all pediatric QoL instruments were published after the year 2000 and the majority originated from the USA (n = 8). Of the 11 oral health-specific QoL instruments, five instruments are designed for the respondent to be a child (i.e., self-report), one uses proxy responses from a parent or guardian, and five instruments have both self and proxy versions. Of the five generic QoL instruments, one uses proxy responses and the other four instruments have both self and proxy versions. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified a wide variety of pediatric oral health-specific and generic QoL instruments used in oral health research among children and adolescents. The availability of these QoL instruments provides researchers with the opportunity to select the instrument most suited to address their research question.

The cost-effectiveness of oral health interventions: A systematic review of cost-utility analyses.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the usage of cost-utility analysis (CUA) in oral health interventions and to evaluate the methods used and the reporting quality of CUA in publications on oral health interventions. METHODS: A systematic review was performed on literature published between 2000 and 2016 where cost-utility analyses of oral health interventions were included. The reporting quality of these oral health CUAs was assessed against the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. RESULTS: Of the 6637 publications identified initially, 23 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 14 (61%) had been published in the last 6 years. Included studies were on oral cancer (n = 6), provision of dental prosthesis (n = 6), dental caries (n = 4), periodontal diseases (n = 3), antibiotic prophylaxis (n = 2), dento-facial anomalies (n = 1) and dental service provision (n = 1). Twenty-one studies were able to identify the most cost-effective intervention among the different options compared. Of the 23 studies identified, 15 (65%) used quality-adjusted life years (QALY) as the outcome measure, and 18 (78%) reported an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The economic perspective was clearly stated in 13 articles (57%). Twenty studies (87%) reported the discount rate, and 22 (96%) undertook sensitivity analysis. The reporting quality of studies, appraised by the CHEERS checklist, varied from 75% to 100% (median 92%). CONCLUSION: The use of CUAs in evaluation of oral health interventions has been increasing recently, especially from 2011 to 2016. The majority of CUA articles were of good reporting quality as assessed by the CHEERS checklist and were able to provide conclusions regarding the most cost-effective intervention among the different options compared: this will assist in healthcare decision-making and resource allocation. These positive outcomes of our study encourage wider use of CUAs within the dental and oral health professions.