Comparing the Efficiencies of Third Molar Surgeries With and Without a Dentist Anesthesiologist.

Two different anesthesia models were compared in terms of surgical duration, safer outcomes, and economic implications. Third molar surgeries performed with and without a separate dentist anesthesiologist were evaluated by a retrospective data analysis of the surgical operative times. For more difficult surgeries, substantially shorter operative times were observed with the dentist anesthesiologist model, leading to a more favorable surgical outcome. An example calculation is presented to demonstrate economic advantages of scheduling the participation of a dentist anesthesiologist for more difficult surgeries.

A retrospective investigation of the oral health records of a cohort of preschool children who received extractions under general anaesthesia including cost analysis of treatment.

Internationally, a considerable proportion of children aged five years and younger require extraction of teeth due to dental caries and frequently dental general anaesthesia (DGA) is the treatment of choice. AIMS: To investigate the records of a cohort of preschool children (aged five years and younger) referred to the public dental service provided at Cork University Hospital (CUH), Cork, Ireland, for extractions under DGA between the years 2000 and 2002. To determine the characteristics of the sample: disadvantage; the presence of a significant medical history; and, fluoride status. To establish the pattern of appointments and care, before, during and after DGA, and the pattern of dental treatment required up to sixth class (aged 11 to 12 years). METHODS: A retrospective review of dental records of a cohort of preschool-aged children referred for DGA in CUH during the years 2000-2002 was completed. Demographic and clinical data were collated and analysed using Statistical Packages for Social Sciences (SPSS). Costs were provided by CUH and the Health Service Executive (HSE). Data on costs relating to preventive programmes were obtained from information presented in the Irish Oral Health Services Guideline Initiative 2009. RESULTS: A total of 347 children were included with a median age of.fQur years and a range of one to five years. Children with a disadvantage were more likely to require extractions under DGA than their- counterparts (50%, n=175). In total, 73% (n=253)~ of patients had a fluoridated water supply and 91% (n=316) had no adverse medical history. For 88% (n=306), their first dental visit was an emergency appointment. The primary indication for DGA was treatment of dental caries. A recall appointment was provided for 18% (n=63). One-quarter (n=86) required an extraction, antibiotic or referral for a second DGA at their first visit following DGA. In first class, referral for a second DGA or extraction under local anaesthetic (LA) was required for 23% (n=79) of patients. Over 60% (n=21 1) required either an extraction or a restoration in third class. In excess of 20% (n=69) of patients did not attend the sixth class dental inspection, the final assessment appointment in the public services. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable number of preschool children require extractions under DGA due to dental caries. The results of this study indicate that such children progress to adolescence with poor oral health, as evidenced by the need for further restorations, extractions and repeat DGA. The average cost of DGA was E819 per child. This figure has been shown to be as much as eight times the cost of a preventive/oral health promotion prograrnme operating within a similar cohort. An integrated preventive programme targeting preschool-aged children should be considered in attempting to manage the hicih levels of dental caries within this age group.

An audit into the reasons why treatment was not completed as planned under intravenous sedation in an adult oral surgery department, and the cost implications.

This audit aimed to identify the prevalence of, and reasons for failed intravenous conscious sedation in an adult oral surgery department, to develop recommendations to reduce such failures and to identify any cost implications. Data were collected prospectively for three months for all intravenous sedation appointments in the Oral Surgery department. Data were collected for 109 sedation appointments of which 83 were successful (76%). The failure rate (24%) was higher than the acceptable departmental failure rate (10%), and included reasons for failure that should have been avoided by a thorough patient assessment prior to treatment. Of the 26 failures, the most common reasons for failure were: cancellation: 8 patients (30.8%), failure to attend: 6 patients (23.1%), excessively late arrival of patient: 4 patients (15.4%) and failure to cannulate: 3 patients (11.6%). When sedation was unsuccessful, 13 of the 26 patients (50%) had their treatment successfully completed under local anaesthesia alone, 10 patients (38%) were rebooked for sedation and 3 patient. (12%) were rebooked for a general anaesthetic. Identifying and correcting the reasons for failure can result in vast savings in appointment time, clinical resources and cost. That 13 patients subsequently had their treatment completed under local anaesthesia alone opens the debate on how rigorous the patient assessment and allocation of sedation appointments was, and the potential to achieve savings.

What costs are associated with the management of third molars?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to estimate the treatment costs directly related to operative and nonoperative management of asymptomatic, disease-free, third molar (M3) teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data reviewed were limited to claims submitted by oral and maxillofacial surgeons. The data collected included charges for consultations, radiographs, surgical removal of bony impacted teeth, and general anesthesia, using the 2009 data extracts from Delta Dental of Virginia. The median charges were used as a proxy for the actual costs attributable to the removal or retention of M3 teeth. Three clinical scenarios were executed using the available claims data to calculate the treatment costs associated with nonoperative and operative M3 management. An assumption made in the computation of expenses was that for subjects who elected to retain their M3s, the recommended management strategy was active surveillance. Active surveillance is a prescribed treatment to monitor the retained M3s characterized by performing a clinical examination and panoramic imaging every 2 years. The author assumed a 3% increase in charges per annum. RESULTS: The 3 scenarios were as follows: scenario 1 (nonoperative management), retention of asymptomatic, disease-free M3s and monitoring for 20 years from age 18 to 38 years; scenario 2 (operative management), removal of 2 asymptomatic, disease-free, bony impacted M3s for 18-year-old patients using general anesthesia (30 minutes) in an office-based ambulatory setting; and scenario 3 (failure of non-operative management), removal of 1 previously asymptomatic, disease-free, bony impacted M3 after 10 years of follow-up in a now 28-year-old patient using general anesthesia (30 minutes) in an office-based ambulatory setting. The estimated charges for managing M3s were $2,342, $1,184, and $1,997 for scenarios 1, 2, and 3, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A simplified financial analysis derived from the dental claims data suggests that during the course of the patient's lifetime, the charges associated with non-operative management of asymptomatic, disease-free M3s will exceed the charges of operative management. The difference in costs might be important to patients when choosing between operative and non-operative management of their M3s.

Comparison of propofol-remifentanil versus propofol-ketamine deep sedation for third molar surgery.

This study aimed to compare continuous intravenous infusion combinations of propofol-remifentanil and propofol-ketamine for deep sedation for surgical extraction of all 4 third molars. In a prospective, randomized, double-blinded controlled study, participants received 1 of 2 sedative combinations for deep sedation for the surgery. Both groups initially received midazolam 0.03 mg/kg for baseline sedation. The control group then received a combination of propofol-remifentanil in a ratio of 10 mg propofol to 5 µg of remifentanil per milliliter, and the experimental group received a combination of propofol-ketamine in a ratio of 10 mg of propofol to 2.5 mg of ketamine per milliliter; both were given at an initial propofol infusion rate of 100 µg/kg/min. Each group received an induction loading bolus of 500 µg/kg of the assigned propofol combination along with the appropriate continuous infusion combination . Measured outcomes included emergence and recovery times, various sedation parameters, hemodynamic and respiratory stability, patient and surgeon satisfaction, postoperative course, and associated drug costs. Thirty-seven participants were enrolled in the study. Both groups demonstrated similar sedation parameters and hemodynamic and respiratory stability; however, the ketamine group had prolonged emergence (13.6 ± 6.6 versus 7.1 ± 3.7 minutes, P = .0009) and recovery (42.9 ± 18.7 versus 24.7 ± 7.6 minutes, P = .0004) times. The prolonged recovery profile of continuously infused propofol-ketamine may limit its effectiveness as an alternative to propofol-remifentanil for deep sedation for third molar extraction and perhaps other short oral surgical procedures, especially in the ambulatory dental setting.

Retrospective audit of Taranaki children undergoing dental care under general anaesthetic from 2001 to 2005.

A retrospective audit of trends in day-stay treatment for dental caries at a New Zealand hospital dental unit showed that demand for treatment has risen. The annual number of children undergoing a GA increased by over 13%, although the average waiting time after the initial consultation decreased. The cost of treatment also dramatically increased with time, as the numbers and complexity of cases increased. The type of treatment under GA changed over the five years, with more extractions occurring over the course of the audit. Restorations were still the most common treatment item provided, although the use of SSC trebled in 2004 and 2005. Socio-economic status, sex and ethnic differences were observed, with more boys and Maori receiving GA care and having a higher number of extractions. These children were identified as being high users of other hospital services (such as the Emergency Department).

[Economic evaluation of treatments under dental general anesthesia and protective stabilization].

Objective: To conduct economic evaluation of treatments under dental general anesthesia (DGA) and protective stabilization (PS), in order to compare the cost and the final therapeutic effect of these two treatments. Methods: Retrospectively studied twenty-six 2 to 4 years old patients treated under DGA and twenty-seven treated under PS in the Department of Pediatric Dentistry, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology. The general information, treatment information and total treatment cost information of patients were collected. The cost and cost-survival time ratio of the two groups were compared in units of people and tooth respectively. When compared in unit of people, patients were divided into two groups depending on the number of teeth treated, when compared in unit of tooth, teeth were divided into two groups depending on the treatment received, i.e. restoration or root canal treatment. In addition, we recalculated and compared two groups under the assumption that the treatment charges of DGA was consistent with common outpatient charges. Results: The tooth average cost and cost-survival time ratio of each patient in DGA group which were [(1 133.87±87.37) yuan] and [3.51 (1.30, 5.72) yuan/d] respectively were significantly higher than those in PS group which were [(303.81±155.34) yuan] and [1.54 (0.95, 2.13) yuan/d] respectively (P<0.01). The number of teeth and the way of treatments wouldn't change the result. The recalculated result of the cost-survival time ratio of each patient in DGA group [1.63 (0.72, 2.55) yuan/d] and PS group [1.54 (0.95, 2.13) yuan/d] showed no significant difference (P=0.455). Conclusions: Patients treated in Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology showed a significant higher cost and cost-survival time radio in DGA group than that in PS group. If the treatment charges of DGA group was consistent with common outpatient charges, PS group will no longer have economic advantage.

Minimally-invasive dental anesthesia: Patients' preferences and analysis of the willingness-to-pay index.

AIM: The aim of the present prospective study was to evaluate the impact of a computer-controlled anesthesia on patients' comfort and to investigate, through the willingness-to-pay (WTP) index, and patients' acceptance of this new technology. METHODS: Fifty patients undergoing a class I or II restorative procedure were enrolled. A computer-controlled device for anesthetic delivery was utilized, and a questionnaire on the level of discomfort and WTP was given to all patients. RESULTS: A total of 86% of participants declared less discomfort than that perceived during their last traditional procedure for pain control; 58% of patients were willing to pay an additional fee for a modern anesthesia technique, with a median WTP value of 20$. CONCLUSIONS: Computer-controlled systems for local anesthesia represent a relevant tool for reducing patients' discomfort during dental treatment. The WTP index helps to quantify its relevance.

Dental Treatment and Expenditures Under General Anesthesia Among Medicaid-Enrolled Children in North Carolina.

PURPOSE: Many studies reporting dental utilization under general anesthesia (GA) are dated. The purpose of this study was to provide contemporaneous data about children receiving dental GA by: (1) determining trends in utilization and associated expenditures; and (2) examining the effects of provider distribution. METHODS: This time series cross-sectional study of Medicaid-eligible children ages zero to eight years old in North Carolina used aggregate Medicaid claims from State Fiscal Years (SFY) 2011 to 2015 to collect demographic and dental treatment information. Descriptive statistics were stratified by age and year to examine trends over time. Panel analysis techniques were used to explore regional effects of provider distribution on dental GA utilization. RESULTS: For SFY 2011 to 2015, the overall dental utilization rate was 517.1 per 1,000 (total enrolled equals 632,941 children/year), and the dental GA utilization rate was 15.8 per 1,000. Total dental expenditures averaged $113 million per year, and dental GA averaged $16.7 million per year. The dental GA proportion of expenditures increased over time (P<.001). Provider distribution did not affect dental GA utilization rate (P=.178) but did increase the number of children receiving dental GA (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Utilization and expenditures associated with dental treatment under general anesthesia continue to increase. While this reflects increased access to care, interventions should be examined to provide preventive care earlier in a child's life.

Exploring the potential value of using data on dental extractions under general anaesthesia (DGA) to monitor the impact of dental decay in children.

Aim To explore the value of DGA data as an indicator of the impact and inequalities associated with child dental decay (caries) in Southampton.Design Data from the local DGA provider in Southampton was used to investigate trends in child (17 years and under) DGAs between 2006/7 and 2014/15. Retrospective analysis of anonymised child-level 2013/14 and 2014/15 data from the same service was carried out to identify any inequalities with respect to deprivation, impact on school attendance and cost to the health economy.Results Around 400-500 Southampton children needed a DGA annually within this period. There were year-on-year variations, but no upward or downward trend. The DGA rate was 2.5 to three times higher in the most deprived quintile compared to the least. This translates to an equivalent gap in school absences, which could impact on educational achievement. The cost of these procedures in 2014/15 was around £210,000.Conclusions DGA data have value in highlighting the impact and inequalities associated with dental decay on children and the wider economy. Nationally, they could be used for benchmarking. Locally, these data could be used to target and evaluate health improvement programmes as well as to highlight DGA service changes that would disproportionately affect children from more deprived backgrounds.

A comparison of costs in providing dental care for special needs patients under sedation or general anaesthesia in the North East of England.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs of providing dental treatment under general anaesthesia or sedation for special needs patients. METHODS: After a Delphi exercise, a questionnaire was designed, piloted and then sent to nine NHS Trust dental service managers, within the Salaried Dental Services in the North East of England, to obtain information on the costs incurred during the treatment of special needs patients using sedation or general anaesthesia. The questionnaire related to the average number of such patients treated per session, staff costs, depreciation cost for buildings and equipment, and overhead costs including consumables and drugs. RESULTS: All nine dental service managers returned completed questionnaires. The all-inclusive cost for treatment per patient under general anaesthesia ranged from 203.65-479.50 pounds (mean cost: 285.79 pounds) and for sedation from 57.60-153.50 pounds (mean cost: 90.81 pounds). On average three special needs patients were treated per session. The greatest variation in the costs for general anaesthesia was due to staffing costs, which ranged from 1064.10 to 350.00 pounds per session across the Trusts. CONCLUSIONS: In the small number of centres sampled, the cost of delivering dental care under sedation or general anaesthesia was shown to vary widely. Overall, the mean cost of sedation was one-third that of general anaesthesia. However, the cost of both was substantial and cognisance needs to be taken of the costs of such services.

Need and demand for sedation or general anesthesia in dentistry: a national survey of the Canadian population.

The aim of this study was to assess the need and demand for sedation or general anesthesia (GA) for dentistry in the Canadian adult population. A national telephone survey of 1101 Canadians found that 9.8% were somewhat afraid of dental treatment, with another 5.5% having a high level of fear. Fear or anxiety was the reason why 7.6% had ever missed, cancelled, or avoided a dental appointment. Of those with high fear, 49.2% had avoided a dental appointment at some point because of fear or anxiety as opposed to only 5.2% from the no or low fear group. Regarding demand, 12.4% were definitely interested in sedation or GA for their dentistry and 42.3% were interested depending on cost. Of those with high fear, 31.1% were definitely interested, with 54.1% interested depending on cost. In a hypothetical situation where endodontics was required because of a severe toothache, 12.7% reported high fear. This decreased to 5.4% if sedation or GA were available. For this procedure, 20.4% were definitely interested in sedation or GA, and another 46.1% were interested depending on cost. The prevalence of, and preference for, sedation or GA was assessed for specific dental procedures. The proportion of the population with a preference for sedation or GA was 7.2% for cleaning, 18% for fillings or crowns, 54.7% for endodontics, 68.2% for periodontal surgery, and 46.5% for extraction. For each procedure, the proportion expressing a preference for sedation or GA was significantly greater than the proportion having received treatment with sedation or GA (P < 0.001). In conclusion, this study demonstrates that there is significant need and demand for sedation and GA in the Canadian adult population.

Patient evaluation of a novel non-injectable anesthetic gel: a multicenter crossover study comparing the gel to infiltration anesthesia during scaling and root planing.

BACKGROUND: Periodontal scaling procedures commonly require some kind of anesthesia. From the patient's perspective, the choice of anesthetic method is a trade-off between the degree of anesthesia and accepting the side effects. The present study evaluates the preferences for a novel non-injection anesthetic product (a gel, containing lidocaine 25 mg/g plus prilocaine 25 mg/g and thermosetting agents) versus injection anesthesia (lidocaine 2% adrenaline) in conjunction with scaling and/or root planing (SRP). METHODS: In a multicenter, crossover, randomized, open study patients were asked, after they had experienced both products, if they preferred anesthetic gel or injection anesthesia. In addition, the adequacy of anesthesia and occurrence of post-procedure problems were assessed. The patients were also asked about their willingness to return if they were offered anesthetic gel at their next visit and their maximum willingness to pay (WTP) for this option. RESULTS: One-hundred seventy (170) patients at eight centers in Belgium were included in the study. There were 157 per protocol (PP) patients. A vast majority of the PP patients (70%) preferred the anesthetic gel to injection anesthesia (22%). The most common reason was less post-procedure numbness. Eighty percent (80%) of the patients expressed satisfactory anesthesia with the gel and 96% with injection anesthesia (P <0.001). Post-procedure problems were significantly less with the gel than with injection (P <0.001): numbness 15% versus 66%, unpleasant sensations such as soreness and pain 44% versus 63%, and problems connected with daily activities 19% versus 69%. The majority of patients (60%) who preferred gel were also willing to pay for it. A conservative estimate of the median WTP was $10.00. Furthermore, anesthetic gel would make almost every second patient (45%) more or much more willing to return for the next treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that a somewhat less profound anesthesia with gel is clearly preferred by the patients because of the low incidence of post-procedure problems as compared to conventional injection anesthesia. The median WTP is likely in excess of the acquisition cost of the product, which indicates a favorable cost-benefit ratio for the individual patient.

A retrospective analysis of the costs associated with the treatment of nursing caries in a remote Canadian aboriginal preschool population.

Nursing caries is a specific form of rampant dental caries affecting the majority of preschool aboriginal children who live in the Province of Manitoba, Canada. Since the majority of these individuals live in remote regions of the province access to dental treatment is difficult, resulting in long delays in the provision of treatment and, most likely, significant morbidity associated with dental pain and oral infection. Travel to distant centres for treatment under general anesthesia by pediatric dentists has become the usual method by which treatment is provided to the majority of affected children. We believed that this was an expensive method of providing these necessary services and our purpose was to document all costs associated with the treatment of nursing caries in this population. We analyzed the records of 884 children who were treated for nursing caries between 1980 and 1988 in Manitoba and collected data for costs in the following categories: travel, lodging, medical, dental, hospital and nursing. Our results show that the remote band groups had significantly higher costs (P < 0.001) than groups which were located closer to treatment centres. The costs which accounted primarily for this significant difference were travel and medical costs associated with hospitalization and the administration of general anesthesia. Our results support the need for the redeployment of resources on the basis of regional need and the development of community-based preventive programs and treatment programs which will significantly reduce the incidence of nursing caries in preschool Canadian aboriginal children.

Medicaid costs associated with the hospitalization of young children for restorative dental treatment under general anesthesia.

OBJECTIVE: This paper examines the cost to the Iowa Medicaid program of hospitalizing young children for restorative dental care under general anesthesia, and describes the dental services received in this setting. METHODS: Medicaid dental claims for young children receiving restorative dental care under general anesthesia during fiscal year 1994 were matched with corresponding hospital and anesthesia claims. RESULTS: The total cost to the Medicaid program of treating a child in the hospital under general anesthesia was $2,009 per case. Less than 2 percent of Medicaid-enrolled children under 6 years of age who received any dental service accounted for 25 percent of all dollars spent on dental services for this age group, including hospital and anesthesia care. The most frequent type of procedure was stainless steel crowns (SSCs), with an average of almost six per case. CONCLUSIONS: Early identification, prevention, and intervention are critically important to prevent the costly treatment of children with ECC in hospital operating rooms.

Office-based anesthesia in dentistry. Past, present, and future trends.

The history of office-based anesthesia dates back to the discovery of nitrous oxide and ether in the 1840s. In recent years, advances in intravenous anesthetic techniques and the rising costs of hospital-based services have combined to promote the practice of ambulatory anesthesia. Dental patients who may benefit from office-based anesthesia include patients undergoing stressful procedures, fearful patients, medically or behaviorally challenged patients, young children, and patients with a history of gagging or local anesthesia problems. The future of office-based anesthesia in dentistry appears bright. Its development, however, will be influenced by organized dentistry, medical anesthesia, and other groups interested in pain and anxiety control, and state legislatures reacting to public demands for both safe and cost-effective anesthesia care.

The use of inhalation sedation and local anaesthesia as an alternative to general anaesthesia for dental extractions in children.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent to which inhalation sedation might replace general anaesthesia for extractions in children and assess the success rate, cost and parental reaction in comparison to general anaesthesia. DESIGN: A matched pair design. SETTING: Unit of paediatric Dentistry at the University Dental Hospital of Manchester, UK between December 1992 and June 1994. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Subjects aged 3 to 16 years who had been referred for extractions under general anaesthesia were used. Data were recorded for each visit and parents were asked to complete a simple post-operative questionnaire. OUTCOME: Treatment success was defined as completion of all treatment planned for the patient. Relative costs were derived from the time taken and staff costs. RESULTS: 265 subjects, mean age 7.63 (+/- 2.45) years had treatment attempted with sedation of whom 221 (83.4%) completed successfully. Young age, multiple extractions and irregular dental attendance predisposed to treatment failure, whereas orthodontic extractions had a similar success rate (97.6%) to general anaesthesia. The cost of sedation was less; parental reaction to sedation was also significantly better. CONCLUSION: Inhalation sedation can be used for many children referred for general anaesthesia. Greater use of this technique in the primary sector is needed to reduce the number of child referrals for general anaesthesia.

Sedation in primary dental care: an investigation in two districts of northern England.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the current provision of sedation in primary dental care and investigate the knowledge and attitudes of dental practitioners and others on the use of sedation. DESIGN: Qualitative interviews and postal questionnaire survey. SETTING: Health districts of Bradford (West Yorkshire) and South Durham, UK in 1996. SUBJECTS AND MATERIALS: 15 key individuals associated with NHS primary dental services were interviewed. Questionnaires were sent to all 260 NHS general dental practitioners and community dental service clinicians. RESULTS: 208 questionnaires (80%) were returned. 42% of respondents reported current sedation use, with oral administration the favoured technique (26%). Significant differences were found between districts for intravenous sedation use (7% Bradford, 41% South Durham, P < 0.001). Almost all participants agreed the value of sedation in dental care for adults and children, for nervous, phobic patients or in association with unpleasant forms of treatment and 45% of dentists felt that provision should be expanded. Training, availability of referral services, finance and patient demand were seen as encouraging factors. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial variations in sedation provision between the two districts were associated with teaching at the nearest dental schools. Innovative use of resources could help the expansion of provision supported in this study.