Development of a United Kingdom-centric cost-effectiveness model for denture cleaning strategies.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Denture stomatitis is a prevalent condition in denture wearers. Economic evaluations of health care can help stakeholders, including patients, make better decisions about treatments for a given condition. Economic models to assess the costs and benefits of different options for managing denture stomatitis are lacking. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to explore the feasibility of developing a cost-effectiveness model to assess denture cleaning strategies aimed at preventing denture stomatitis from a denture-wearer perspective in the United Kingdom. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A model was developed to identify and estimate the costs and effects associated with 3 denture cleaning strategies. These were low care (LC)-cleaning by brushing and soaking overnight in water; medium care (MC)-brushing with toothpaste and soaking overnight in water; and optimum care (OC)-brushing and soaking overnight in water and antimicrobial denture cleanser. Costs, outcome measures (denture stomatitis-free days), and probabilities (incidence of stomatitis, unscheduled dentist visits, prescription charges, self-medication) associated with each strategy were defined. A sensitivity analysis was used to identify key drivers and test the robustness of the model. RESULTS: The model showed that the total costs for 2015 ranged from £1.07 (LC) to £18.42 (OC). Costs associated with LC were derived from unscheduled dentist visits and use of medication and/or prescription charges. Incremental costs per denture stomatitis-free day were £0.64 (MC) and £1.81 (OC) compared with LC. A sensitivity analysis showed that varying either or both key parameters (baseline incidence of denture stomatitis and relative effectiveness of MC and OC strategies) had a substantial effect. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from £4.11 to £7.39 (worst-case scenario) and from £0.21 to £0.61 (best-case scenario). CONCLUSIONS: A model was developed to assess the relative cost-effectiveness of different denture cleaning strategies to help improve denture hygiene. An important finding of the study was the lack of evidence on the relative effectiveness of different cleaning strategies, meaning that several assumptions had to be incorporated into the model. The model output would therefore likely be considerably improved and more robust if these evidence gaps were filled.

Sensitivity and specificity of assessment scales of dentin hypersensitivity - an accuracy study.

The aim of the present study was to compare the sensitivity and specificity of pain scales used to assess dentin hypersensitivity (DH). The preferred scale, and toothbrushing habits of participants were also investigated. This cross-sectional study was conducted with students and employees of a Brazilian Federal University who presented DH. The participants answered a questionnaire about their toothbrushing and drinking habits. Hypersensitive and non-sensitive teeth were submitted to tactile and ice stick stimuli. Then, the subjects marked their pain level in the visual analogue (VAS), numeric scale (NS), faces pain scale (FPS) and verbal evaluation scale (VES). DH was also assessed by Schiff scale (SS). The data were analyzed by Wilcoxon and Chi-Square tests, as well as by ROC curve. The mean age of the sample (56 women, 16 men) was 27.8 years. The most prevalent acidic beverage was coffee (36.0%) and the most preferred scale was the NS (47.2%). The pain level was statistically higher in teeth with DH compared to teeth without DH (p < 0.05). The accuracy ranged from 0.729 (SS) to 0.750 (NS). The highest sensitivity value was 81.9% for NS. The SS presented the highest specificity (91%). The visual analog, numerical, verbal evaluation, faces pain, and Schiff scales were accurate for DH diagnosis. The Schiff scale was the preferred scale for DH assessment.

Sensitivity and specificity of assessment scales of dentin hypersensitivity - an accuracy study

Abstract The aim of the present study was to compare the sensitivity and specificity of pain scales used to assess dentin hypersensitivity (DH). The preferred scale, and toothbrushing habits of participants were also investigated. This cross-sectional study was conducted with students and employees of a Brazilian Federal University who presented DH. The participants answered a questionnaire about their toothbrushing and drinking habits. Hypersensitive and non-sensitive teeth were submitted to tactile and ice stick stimuli. Then, the subjects marked their pain level in the visual analogue (VAS), numeric scale (NS), faces pain scale (FPS) and verbal evaluation scale (VES). DH was also assessed by Schiff scale (SS). The data were analyzed by Wilcoxon and Chi-Square tests, as well as by ROC curve. The mean age of the sample (56 women, 16 men) was 27.8 years. The most prevalent acidic beverage was coffee (36.0%) and the most preferred scale was the NS (47.2%). The pain level was statistically higher in teeth with DH compared to teeth without DH (p < 0.05). The accuracy ranged from 0.729 (SS) to 0.750 (NS). The highest sensitivity value was 81.9% for NS. The SS presented the highest specificity (91%). The visual analog, numerical, verbal evaluation, faces pain, and Schiff scales were accurate for DH diagnosis. The Schiff scale was the preferred scale for DH assessment.

Risk Assessment for Tooth Wear.

Tooth wear has an increasing prevalence in the UK population. The aetiology is commonly multifactorial, and the aetiopathology is through a combination of erosion, attrition, abrasion and abfraction. Erosion is associated with intrinsic or extrinsic acids, and therefore subjects with reflux disease and eating disorders are at increased risk. Fruit juice, fruits and carbonated drink consumption, frequency of consumption and specific habits are also risk factors. Attrition is more prevalent in bruxists. Other habits need to be considered when defining the risk of tooth wear. Abrasion is usually associated with toothbrushing and toothpastes, especially in an already acidic environment. Patients with extensive lesions that affect dentin may be at higher risk, as well as those presenting with unstained lesions. Monitoring of the progress of tooth wear is recommended to identify those with active tooth wear. Indices for tooth wear are a helpful aid.

In vitro assessment of human dentin wear resulting from toothbrushing.

It is well-recognized that toothbrushing is the most widely used method for daily oral hygiene maintenance. This in vitro study examines dentin surface wear resulting from the use of an oral hygiene device in a controlled oral condition. Powered toothbrushes produce less wear than manual brushes. However, depending on their design and applied forces, they can also produce varying levels of dentin wear.

Assessment in vitro of brushing on dental surface roughness alteration by laser interferometry.

Noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) are considered to be of multifactorial origin, normally associated with inadequate brushing. This study assessed the influence in vitro of simulated brushing on NCCL formation. Fifteen human premolars were submitted to brushing in the cementoenamel junction region, using hard-, medium- and soft-bristled brushes associated with a toothpaste of medium abrasiveness under a 200 g load, at a speed of 356 rpm for 100 minutes. The surface topography of the region was analyzed before and after brushing, by means of a laser interferometer, using "cut-off" values of 0.25 and considering roughness values in mm. The initial roughness (mm) results for dentin (D / bristle consistency: 1--soft, 2--medium and 3--hard) were as follows: (D1) 1.25 +/- 0.45; (D2) 1.12 +/- 0.44; (D3) 1.05 +/- 0.41. For enamel (E / bristle consistency: 1--soft, 2--medium and 3--hard), the initial results were: (E1) 1.18 +/- 0.35; (E2) 1.32 +/- 0.25; (E3) 1.50 +/- 0.38. After brushing, the following were the values for dentin: (D1) 2.32 +/- 1.99; (D2) 3.30 +/- 0.96; (D3) Over 500. For enamel, the values after brushing were: (E1) 1.37 +/- 0.31; (E2) 2.15 +/- 0.90; (E3) 1.22 +/- 0.47. Based on the results of the ANOVA and Tukey statistical analyses (a = .05) it was concluded that soft, medium and hard brushes are not capable of abrading enamel, whereas dentin showed changes in surface roughness by the action of medium- and hard-bristled brushes.

Assessment in vitro of brushing on dental surface roughness alteration by laser interferometry

Noncarious cervical lesions (NCCLs) are considered to be of multifactorial origin, normally associated with inadequate brushing. This study assessed the influence in vitro of simulated brushing on NCCL formation. Fifteen human premolars were submitted to brushing in the cementoenamel junction region, using hard-, medium- and soft-bristled brushes associated with a toothpaste of medium abrasiveness under a 200 g load, at a speed of 356 rpm for 100 minutes. The surface topography of the region was analyzed before and after brushing, by means of a laser interferometer, using "cut-off" values of 0.25 and considering roughness values in mm. The initial roughness (mm) results for dentin (D / bristle consistency: 1 - soft, 2 - medium and 3 - hard) were as follows: (D1) 1.25 ± 0.45; (D2) 1.12 ± 0.44; (D3) 1.05 ± 0.41. For enamel (E / bristle consistency: 1 - soft, 2 - medium and 3 - hard), the initial results were: (E1) 1.18 ± 0.35; (E2) 1.32 ± 0.25; (E3) 1.50 ± 0.38. After brushing, the following were the values for dentin: (D1) 2.32 ± 1.99; (D2) 3.30 ± 0.96; (D3) Over 500. For enamel, the values after brushing were: (E1) 1.37 ± 0.31; (E2) 2.15 ± 0.90; (E3) 1.22 ± 0.47. Based on the results of the ANOVA and Tukey statistical analyses (a = .05) it was concluded that soft, medium and hard brushes are not capable of abrading enamel, whereas dentin showed changes in surface roughness by the action of medium- and hard-bristled brushes.

A pilot assessment of alternative methods of quantifying dental pain with particular reference to dentine hypersensitivity.

OBJECTIVE: The overall aim of this pilot study was to establish the usefulness and comparability of selected verbal and non-verbal methods in the quantification of sensory and affective aspects of dental pain associated with dentine hypersensitivity (DH). DESIGN: The assessment of dental pain was conducted during an eight week clinical study. Patients were asked to rate their perception of dental pain using selected methods of quantification following tactile (Yeaple Probe-an electronic pressure-sensitive probe) and evaporative (cold air from a dental air syringe) stimulation; together with an overall assessment of perception to daily stimuli (e.g., cold air/water, toothbrushing, sweet and sour foods). The assessment methods used to quantify pain arising from DH were a continuous visual analogue scale (VAS), a 0-10 numerical rating VAS scale (NRS), and a separate intensity verbal descriptor (IVD) and unpleasantness verbal descriptor (UVD) word scales. SETTING: A specialist department at a postgraduate dental institute and hospital in London, UK. SUBJECTS: Twenty-five adult patients (8M + 17F) with a mean age of 42.6 years (95 per cent C.I. 38.8 to 46.4 years) attending the department for a clinical study evaluating the efficacy of a desensitising toothpaste agreed to participate. OUTCOME MEASURES: The study compared a continuous visual analogue scale (VAS), a 0-10 numerical rating visual analogue scale (NRS), and a separate intensity (IVD) and unpleasantness verbal descriptor (UVD) scales to quantify sensory and affective aspects of pain. An unweighted moving average technique was used to construct graphs of the relative frequency of reported severity gradings over a range of 0-10. RESULTS: The results of the study indicated that cold air appeared to cause greater discomfort to the patient than tactile sensitivity, with the air intensity curve for both IVD and 0-10 VAS peaking at a severity score of 5 while continuous VAS peaked at a score of 3-4. All methods peaked at score 2 for tactile sensitivity. The UVD scale peaked at score 2-3 and again at 6 for air sensitivity, but conformed to the other scales by peaking at score 2 for tactile sensitivity. NRS and IVD scales therefore appeared to provide acceptable alternatives to continuous VAS, but the UVD scale, probably because of the imprecise nature of the words used in the scale, did not. CONCLUSIONS: This study partially confirms previous conclusions that both verbal and non-verbal techniques quantify sensory and affective aspects of pain. However, the imprecise nature of UVD words provided misleading information in terms of both accuracy and sensitivity (except at very low levels of discomfort), when assessing pain arising from dentine hypersensitivity. In view of the highly subjective data arising from studies of this nature, the use of a moving average technique may be considered a more pragmatic method of analysis.