Cost-Savings of Fluoride Varnish Application in Primary Care for Medicaid-Enrolled Children in Virginia.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the cost-benefit of fluoride varnish application during pediatric well-visits for the Medicaid/Children's Health Insurance Program population in Virginia (VA) from a Medicaid payer perspective. To provide initial cost estimates from the primary care provider (PCP) perspective. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic search of recent literature was completed to obtain input data for a Monte Carlo cost-benefit simulation and for the fluoride varnish application time, labor, and materials costs for PCPs. The analysis was conducted from a Medicaid perspective; costs and savings related to fluoride varnish application in primary dentition through 7.5 years were calculated for all Medicaid-eligible children up to 3 years of age in VA. Sensitivity analysis was performed to mitigate the effects of parameter uncertainty. RESULTS: Delivering fluoride varnish to all children <3 years old in VA who annually receive well-visits through Medicaid but did not receive fluoride varnish at those visits would reduce the percent of 7.5 year olds with decay from 63.2% to 39.8%. Accounting for averted restoration cost, PCP fluoride varnish application would save $75.32 per child, or a total population savings of almost $2 million/year for VA Medicaid. From the PCP perspective, the Medicaid reimbursement rate for fluoride varnish is 3.8-12.0 times the direct fluoride varnish application cost (labor and materials). CONCLUSIONS: Application of fluoride varnish by a PCP to children under 3 years of age is cost-saving in this study population. Costs to provide fluoride varnish from the PCP perspective are favorable compared with the Medicaid reimbursement, but additional studies on optimizing fluoride varnish application into the well-visit workflow are needed.

Public health sealant delivery programs: optimal delivery and the cost of practice acts.

BACKGROUND: The greatest unmet health need for US children is dental care. School-based sealant programs target low-income, high-risk second graders and are effective in preventing caries for as long as the sealant material remains in place. However, it is not clear whether such programs make efficient use of available resources and staffing. METHODS: The authors used discrete event simulation to determine the optimal combinations of staffing levels and sealant stations for school-based sealant programs. Using data provided by state programs and the literature, they modeled different-sized programs under different practice act constraints and determined times and associated costs. A detailed economic analysis was done for Wisconsin. RESULTS: For general, direct, or indirect supervision, it is optimal to have only 1 dentist or no dentists for no supervision. For general supervision, it is optimal to have the dentist and dental assistant to come on separate days to screen. The cost savings for adding an assistant and chair averaged over all of the program sizes and travel distances ranged from 4.50% (SE= 0.89) to 10.94% (SE= 0.56). Significant cost savings also result from reducing the required supervision level (8.72% [SE = 1.61] to 29.96% [SE= 1.67]). The cost of the practice act for the state of Wisconsin for 2003 was from USD 83,041 to USD 346,156, significantly more than its annual budget. CONCLUSIONS: States could save money by relaxing restrictions on the type of personnel who can deliver sealants in public health settings and by productivity gains through proper consideration of staffing. The savings could be used to improve access to sealant programs and further reduce disparities in oral health.