Kari Jones1, Scott L Tomar. 1. Division of Public-Private Partnerships, National Center for Health Marketing, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, MS K-39, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA. kjones5@cdc.gov
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare levels of dental utilization and untreated dental decay among children aged 1 to 3 years that are likely to occur under 2 potential guidance policies: (1) pediatricians refer all toddlers to dentists for screening (consistent with American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry and the American Dental Association recommendations; DENT), and (2) pediatricians receive training in caries risk assessment, screen toddlers, and refer at-risk children to dentists (consistent with American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations; PED). METHODS: Using decision analysis, we estimated the impact of PED and DENT assuming alternately unlimited dental capacity for Medicaid-insured patients and fixed Medicaid dental capacity. Results With unlimited capacity, if DENT were implemented, then dental utilization is estimated to increase from 27% under the status quo to 65% and untreated decay to decrease from a mean of 0.60 surfaces to 0.52 surfaces per child. If PED were implemented, then dental utilization and untreated decay would decrease from status quo levels to an estimated 11% and 0.47 surfaces, respectively, assuming that diagnostic sensitivity and specificity both equaled 1; they would decrease to 13% and 0.53 surfaces, respectively, if sensitivity equaled 0.76 and specificity equaled 0.95. With fixed capacity, under DENT, untreated decay is estimated to increase to 0.63 surfaces because low-risk private-pay patients would crowd out at-risk Medicaid-insured children, whereas under PED, untreated decay would still be less than under the status quo. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing PED will decrease untreated decay under most plausible scenarios, whereas switching to DENT will increase the burden of disease if Medicaid dental capacity is limited.
OBJECTIVE: To compare levels of dental utilization and untreated dental decay among children aged 1 to 3 years that are likely to occur under 2 potential guidance policies: (1) pediatricians refer all toddlers to dentists for screening (consistent with American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry and the American Dental Association recommendations; DENT), and (2) pediatricians receive training in caries risk assessment, screen toddlers, and refer at-risk children to dentists (consistent with American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations; PED). METHODS: Using decision analysis, we estimated the impact of PED and DENT assuming alternately unlimited dental capacity for Medicaid-insured patients and fixed Medicaid dental capacity. Results With unlimited capacity, if DENT were implemented, then dental utilization is estimated to increase from 27% under the status quo to 65% and untreated decay to decrease from a mean of 0.60 surfaces to 0.52 surfaces per child. If PED were implemented, then dental utilization and untreated decay would decrease from status quo levels to an estimated 11% and 0.47 surfaces, respectively, assuming that diagnostic sensitivity and specificity both equaled 1; they would decrease to 13% and 0.53 surfaces, respectively, if sensitivity equaled 0.76 and specificity equaled 0.95. With fixed capacity, under DENT, untreated decay is estimated to increase to 0.63 surfaces because low-risk private-pay patients would crowd out at-risk Medicaid-insured children, whereas under PED, untreated decay would still be less than under the status quo. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing PED will decrease untreated decay under most plausible scenarios, whereas switching to DENT will increase the burden of disease if Medicaid dental capacity is limited.
Authors: Mei Lin; William Sappenfield; Leticia Hernandez; Cheryl Clark; Jihong Liu; Jennifer Collins; Adam C Carle Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2012-12
Authors: S Amanda Dumas; Katelynn E Weaver; Seo Young Park; Deborah E Polk; Robert J Weyant; Debra L Bogen Journal: Clin Pediatr (Phila) Date: 2013-04-09 Impact factor: 1.168
Authors: C Marshall Long; Rocio B Quinonez; Heather A Beil; Kelly Close; Larry P Myers; William F Vann; R Gary Rozier Journal: BMC Pediatr Date: 2012-07-11 Impact factor: 2.125
Authors: Stephanie J Frisbee; Christopher B Chambers; Jefferson C Frisbee; Adam G Goodwill; Richard J Crout Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2010-09-18 Impact factor: 2.757