Cost analysis of endodontic treatment in primary teeth: results from a randomized clinical trial.

This study compared the cost of endodontic treatment in primary teeth involving a technique that does not require root canal instrumentation using antibiotic paste (CTZ) with that of the instrumented technique using iodoform paste (GP). This study is part of a randomized, controlled, parallel arm, noninferiority, 1:1 allocation, blinded (patient) multioperator study of 52 primary incisors of children aged 3 to 6 years with caries lesion and pulp involvement. Each technique was performed according to the creators' descriptions. The cost was assessed by analyzing the costs of capital, dental supplies, and professional labor according to the time taken to perform the procedure and the CHEERS guidelines were used to report the cost assessment. Endodontic treatment with CTZ had a 58.33% lower execution cost than GP (US$6.73 and US$16.15, respectively). The t-test showed significant differences between groups regarding treatment time and total cost (p < 0.0001). The CTZ technique seems to be more economically viable than GP for endodontic treatment of primary teeth, requiring a shorter treatment time and lower costs.

The economic impact of two diagnostic strategies in the management of restorations in primary teeth: a health economic analysis plan for a trial-based economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Different approaches have been used by dentists to base their decision. Among them, there are the aesthetical issues that may lead to more interventionist approaches. Indeed, using a more interventionist strategy (the World Dental Federation - FDI), more replacements tend to be indicated than using a minimally invasive one (based on the Caries Around Restorations and Sealants-CARS). Since the resources related to the long-term health effects of these strategies have not been explored, the economic impact of using the less-invasive strategy is still uncertain. Thus, this health economic analysis plan aims to describe methodologic approaches for conducting a trial-based economic evaluation that aims to assess whether a minimally invasive strategy is more efficient in allocating resources than the conventional strategy for managing restorations in primary teeth and extrapolating these findings to a longer time horizon. METHODS: A trial-based economic evaluation will be conducted, including three cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) and one cost-utility analysis (CUA). These analyses will be based on the main trial (CARDEC-03/ NCT03520309 ), in which children aged 3 to 10 were included and randomized to one of the diagnostic strategies (based on FDI or CARS). An examiner will assess children's restorations using the randomized strategy, and treatment will be recommended according to the same criteria. The time horizon for this study is 2 years, and we will adopt the societal perspective. The average costs per child for 24 months will be calculated. Three different cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) will be performed. For CEAs, the effects will be the number of operative interventions (primary CEA analysis), the time to these new interventions, the percentage of patients who did not need new interventions in the follow-up, and changes in children's oral health-related quality of life (secondary analyses). For CUA, the effect will be tooth-related quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Intention-to-treat analyses will be conducted. Finally, we will assess the difference when using the minimally invasive strategy for each health effect (∆effect) compared to the conventional strategy (based on FDI) as the reference strategy. The same will be calculated for related costs (∆cost). The discount rate of 5% will be applied for costs and effects. We will perform deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to handle uncertainties. The net benefit will be calculated, and acceptability curves plotted using different willingness-to-pay thresholds. Using Markov models, a longer-term economic evaluation will be carried out with trial results extrapolated over a primary tooth lifetime horizon. DISCUSSION: The main trial is ongoing, and data collection is still not finished. Therefore, economic evaluation has not commenced. We hypothesize that conventional strategy will be associated with more need for replacements of restorations in primary molars. These replacements may lead to more reinterventions, leading to higher costs after 2 years. The health effects will be a crucial aspect to take into account when deciding whether the minimally invasive strategy will be more efficient in allocating resources than the conventional strategy when considering the management of restorations in primary teeth. Finally, patients/parents preferences and consequent utility values may also influence this final conclusion about the economic aspects of implementing the minimally invasive approach for managing restorations in clinical practice. Therefore, these trial-based economic evaluations may bring actual evidence of the economic impact of such interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03520309 . Registered May 9, 2018. Economic evaluations (the focus of this plan) are not initiated at the moment.

Cost analysis of endodontic treatment in primary teeth: results from a randomized clinical trial

Abstract: This study compared the cost of endodontic treatment in primary teeth involving a technique that does not require root canal instrumentation using antibiotic paste (CTZ) with that of the instrumented technique using iodoform paste (GP). This study is part of a randomized, controlled, parallel arm, noninferiority, 1:1 allocation, blinded (patient) multioperator study of 52 primary incisors of children aged 3 to 6 years with caries lesion and pulp involvement. Each technique was performed according to the creators' descriptions. The cost was assessed by analyzing the costs of capital, dental supplies, and professional labor according to the time taken to perform the procedure and the CHEERS guidelines were used to report the cost assessment. Endodontic treatment with CTZ had a 58.33% lower execution cost than GP (US$6.73 and US$16.15, respectively). The t-test showed significant differences between groups regarding treatment time and total cost (p < 0.0001). The CTZ technique seems to be more economically viable than GP for endodontic treatment of primary teeth, requiring a shorter treatment time and lower costs.

The effect of two clinical criteria in the assessment of caries lesions around restorations in children (CARDEC-03): study protocol for a diagnostic randomized clinical trial.

Introduction: The detection of caries lesions around restoration can be challenging. Therefore, the use of some criteria has been proposed in order to give more objectivity to the diagnosis process. Two of them are the International Dental Federation (FDI) and the Caries Associated with Restorations and Sealants (CARS) criteria. Both methods have a different approach to caries, and it is not possible to know which one of them is the best to use in clinical practice to assess restorations in children. Thus, the present protocol aims to evaluate the effect of the use of the FDI and CARS criteria in the assessment of caries lesions around restorations in primary teeth on outcomes related to oral health in children and costs resulting from the assessments. Methods and analysis: A total of 626 restorations of children from three to 10 years were randomly assessed and are being treated following the FDI criteria (FDI group) or CARS criteria (CARS group). Participants will be followed-up after six, 12, 18, and 24 months. The primary outcome will be the need for a new intervention in the evaluated restorations. This outcome consists of several components, and each of these events will be analyzed separately as secondary outcomes. The changes in children's oral health-related quality of life and the cost of the restoration dental treatments will also be analyzed as secondary outcomes. The methods will be compared using the Cox regression model with shared frailty. A significance level of 5% will be adopted for all statistical analyses. Discussion: This will be the first randomized clinical study carried out regarding the detection of caries lesions around restorations in primary teeth. Trial registration: The study underwent registration in Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03520309) on 9 May 2018.

Management of dental caries among children: a look at the cost-effectiveness.

INTRODUCTION: Dental caries is the most prevalent non-communicative disease worldwide. Although the etiological factors are well known for years, reducing the number of decayed and missing teeth in children still remains as a barrier. Preventive and curative options are numerous but little is known about their economical advantages. Selecting the intervention that offers the best balance of effectiveness and financial resources becomes crucial in the current situation of budget restrictions worldwide. AREAS COVERED: This expert review summarizes available evidence on cost-effectiveness analyses of preventive and curative measures to manage dental caries in children. EXPERT COMMENTARY: Preventive measures have been more extensively studied than dental caries treatment. Only water fluoridation and tooth brushing are well-established as cost-effective preventive approaches. Despite the increasing number of cost analysis treatment studies in the literature, most of them focus on the cost description, with no correlation to the intervention effectiveness. There is a current need of well-designed and well-reported cost-effectiveness regarding dental caries management.

Efficacy of conventional treatment with composite resin and atraumatic restorative treatment in posterior primary teeth: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the widespread acceptance of conventional treatment using composite resin in primary teeth, there is limited evidence that this approach is the best option in paediatric clinics. Atraumatic restorative treatment (ART) using high-viscosity glass ionomer cement has gradually become more popular because it performs well in clinical studies, is easy to handle and is patient friendly. Therefore, the aim of this randomised clinical trial study is to compare the restoration longevity of conventional treatment using composite resin with that of ART in posterior primary teeth. As secondary outcomes, cost-efficacy and patient self-reported discomfort will also be tested. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Children aged 3-6 years presenting with at least one occlusal and/or occlusal-proximal cavity will be randomly assigned to one of two groups according to the dental treatment: ART (experimental group) or composite resin restoration (control group). The dental treatment will be performed at a dental care trailer located in an educational complex in Barueri/SP, Brazil. The unit of randomisation will be the child. A sample size of 240 teeth with occlusal cavities and 188 teeth with occlusal-proximal cavities has been calculated. The primary outcome will be restoration longevity, which will be clinically assessed after 6, 12, 18 and 24 months by two examiners. The duration of the dental treatment and the cost of all materials used will be considered when estimating the cost-efficacy of each treatment. Individual discomfort will be measured after each dental procedure using the Facial Scale of Wong-Baker. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This clinical trial was approved by the local ethics committee from the Faculty of Dentistry of the University of São Paulo (registration no. 1.556.018). Participants will be included after their legal guardians have signed an informed consent form containing detailed information about the research. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02562456; Pre-results.

Evaluation of the relationship between the cost and properties of glass ionomer cements indicated for atraumatic restorative treatment.

The aim of this study was to evaluate microshear bond strength (µSBS), water sorption and solubility of glass ionomer cements (GIC) indicated for atraumatic restorative treatment (ART). Cylindrical specimens (6 x 2.4 mm) were used to test the sorption and solubility of each GIC (n = 5). The specimens were weighed before and after immersion in water and desiccation. For the µSBS test, 60 primary molars were ground to obtain flat surfaces from both enamel and dentin. The teeth were then assigned to the tested GIC (n = 10) groups, namely Fuji IX - FIX, Ketac Molar - KM and Maxxion R - MX. The exposed surfaces were pre-treated with GIC liquid. Polyethylene tubes were placed on the pre-treated surface and filled with one of the GIC. After 24 h, the specimens were submitted to the µSBS test. The failure mode was assessed using a stereomicroscope (400 x magnification). The powder to liquid ratio and cost of material were also determined (n = 3). The data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test. Linear regression was used to determine the relation between cost and the other variables. Overall, MX showed lower µSBS values (enamel: 3.93 ± 0.38; dentin: 5.04 ± 0.70) than FIX (enamel: 5.95 ± 0.85; dentin: 7.01 ± 1.06) and KM (enamel: 5.91 ± 0.78; dentin: 6.88 ± 1.35), as well as higher sorption and solubility. The regression analyses showed a significant and positive correlation between cost and µSBS in enamel (R2 = 0.62; p < 0.001) and dentin (R2 = 0.43; p < 0.001); and a negative correlation between cost and water sorption (R2 = 0.93; p < 0.001) and solubility (R2 = 0.79; p < 0.001). In conclusion, the materials indicated for ART exhibit distinct physical and mechanical properties; in addition, low-priced materials may interfere with GIC properties.

Evaluation of the relationship between the cost and properties of glass ionomer cements indicated for atraumatic restorative treatment

The aim of this study was to evaluate microshear bond strength (μSBS), water sorption and solubility of glass ionomer cements (GIC) indicated for atraumatic restorative treatment (ART). Cylindrical specimens (6x2.4 mm) were used to test the sorption and solubility of each GIC (n = 5). The specimens were weighed before and after immersion in water and desiccation. For the μSBS test, 60 primary molars were ground to obtain flat surfaces from both enamel and dentin. The teeth were then assigned to the tested GIC (n = 10) groups, namely Fuji IX - FIX, Ketac Molar - KM and Maxxion R – MX. The exposed surfaces were pre-treated with GIC liquid. Polyethylene tubes were placed on the pre-treated surface and filled with one of the GIC. After 24 h, the specimens were submitted to the μSBS test. The failure mode was assessed using a stereomicroscope (400x magnification). The powder to liquid ratio and cost of material were also determined (n = 3). The data were analyzed by ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test. Linear regression was used to determine the relation between cost and the other variables. Overall, MX showed lower μSBS values (enamel: 3.93 ± 0.38; dentin: 5.04 ± 0.70) than FIX (enamel: 5.95 ± 0.85; dentin: 7.01 ± 1.06) and KM (enamel: 5.91 ± 0.78; dentin: 6.88 ± 1.35), as well as higher sorption and solubility. The regression analyses showed a significant and positive correlation between cost and μSBS in enamel (R2 = 0.62; p < 0.001) and dentin (R2 = 0.43; p < 0.001); and a negative correlation between cost and water sorption (R2 = 0.93; p < 0.001) and solubility (R2 = 0.79; p < 0.001). In conclusion, the materials indicated for ART exhibit distinct physical and mechanical properties; in addition, low-priced materials may interfere with GIC properties.