AIM: The aim of this cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), performed from a societal perspective, was to compare costs and consequences of an individually tailored oral health educational programme (ITOHEP) based on cognitive behavioural strategies integrated in non-surgical periodontal treatment compared with a standard treatment programme (ST). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized (n = 113), evaluator-blinded, controlled trial, with two different active treatments, was analysed with respect to their costs and consequences 12 months after non-surgical treatment. Costs referred to both treatment costs and costs contributed by the patient. Consequences (outcome) were expressed as the proportion of individuals classified as having reached the pre-set criteria for treatment success after non-surgical treatment ("successful-NSPT"). RESULTS: More individuals in the ITOHEP group reached the pre-set criteria for treatment success than individuals in the ST group did. The CEA revealed an incremental cost-effectiveness of SEK1724 [€191.09; SEK9.02 = €1 (January 2007)] per "successful-NSPT" case, of which treatment costs represented SEK1189 (€131.82), using the unit cost for a dental hygienist. CONCLUSION: The incremental costs per "successful-NSPT" case can be considered as low and strengthens the suggestion that an ITOHEP integrated into non-surgical periodontal treatment is preferable to a standardized education programme.
RCT Entities:
AIM: The aim of this cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), performed from a societal perspective, was to compare costs and consequences of an individually tailored oral health educational programme (ITOHEP) based on cognitive behavioural strategies integrated in non-surgical periodontal treatment compared with a standard treatment programme (ST). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A randomized (n = 113), evaluator-blinded, controlled trial, with two different active treatments, was analysed with respect to their costs and consequences 12 months after non-surgical treatment. Costs referred to both treatment costs and costs contributed by the patient. Consequences (outcome) were expressed as the proportion of individuals classified as having reached the pre-set criteria for treatment success after non-surgical treatment ("successful-NSPT"). RESULTS: More individuals in the ITOHEP group reached the pre-set criteria for treatment success than individuals in the ST group did. The CEA revealed an incremental cost-effectiveness of SEK1724 [€191.09; SEK9.02 = €1 (January 2007)] per "successful-NSPT" case, of which treatment costs represented SEK1189 (€131.82), using the unit cost for a dental hygienist. CONCLUSION: The incremental costs per "successful-NSPT" case can be considered as low and strengthens the suggestion that an ITOHEP integrated into non-surgical periodontal treatment is preferable to a standardized education programme.
Authors: LaShawn M Hoffman; Latrice Rollins; Tabia Henry Akintobi; Katherine Erwin; Kimberly Lewis; Natalie Hernandez; Assia Miller Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Francesca A Soldani; Thomas Lamont; Kate Jones; Linda Young; Tanya Walsh; Rizwana Lala; Janet E Clarkson Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-10-31
Authors: Tuti Mohd-Dom; Rasidah Ayob; Amrizal Mohd-Nur; Mohd R Abdul-Manaf; Noorlin Ishak; Khairiyah Abdul-Muttalib; Syed M Aljunid; Yuhaniz Ahmad-Yaziz; Hanizah Abdul-Aziz; Noordin Kasan; Ahmad S Mohd-Asari Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2014-05-20 Impact factor: 2.757