Literature DB >> 23857925

Are people who still have their natural teeth willing to pay for mandibular two-implant overdentures?

Akanksha Srivastava1, Jocelyne S Feine, Shahrokh Esfandiari.   

Abstract

AIM: Oral health in Canada and most developed and developing countries is funded by private payers, whose acceptance of treatment depends on their valuation of it. This study aims to determine how dentate individuals in Quebec, Canada, would value the benefits of mandibular two-implant overdentures based on their willingness to pay (WTP) for the treatment, either directly or with insurance/government coverage.
METHODS: A total of 39 individuals (23-54 years) completed a Web-based WTP survey that consisted of three cost scenarios: (a) out-of-pocket payment; (b) private dental insurance coverage; and (c) public funding through additional taxes. Variations in WTP amounts were measured using regression models.
RESULTS: Among respondents who were dentate or missing some teeth, average WTP out of pocket for implant overdentures was CAD$5419 for a 90% success rate. They were willing to pay an average CAD$169 as one-time payment for private dental insurance, with a one in five chance of becoming edentate. WTP amounts increased substantially with the probability of success of implant overdenture therapy. The results of regression analyses were consistent with theoretical predictions for education level and income (P < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study, within its limitations, suggest that dentate individuals would be willing to pay a significant amount to receive mandibular two-implant overdentures if and when they become edentate.
© 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  contingent valuation; dental health insurance; economic; implant; public funding

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23857925     DOI: 10.1111/jicd.12057

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Investig Clin Dent        ISSN: 2041-1618


  6 in total

1.  The value of adult orthodontics: Do the public's willingness-to-pay values reflect the profession's?

Authors:  Kathryn Edwards; Jennifer Rae; Sarah Rolland; Christopher R Vernazza
Journal:  J Orthod       Date:  2021-09-06

Review 2.  Critical review of willingness to pay for clinical oral health interventions.

Authors:  Sharon Hui Xuan Tan; Christopher R Vernazza; Rahul Nair
Journal:  J Dent       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 4.379

3.  Comparison of Three Prosthodontic Treatment Modalities for Patients with Periodontally Compromised Anterior Mandibular Teeth: A 2-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Asja Čelebić; Sanja Peršić; Ines Kovačić; Dino Buković; Nikolina Lešić; Ksenija Rener-Sitar
Journal:  Acta Stomatol Croat       Date:  2019-03

4.  Cost-effectiveness of implant-supported dental prosthesis compared to conventional dental prosthesis.

Authors:  Livia Fernandes Probst; Tazio Vanni; Denise de Fátima Barros Cavalcante; Erica Tatiane da Silva; Yuri Wanderley Cavalcanti; Luis Augusto Passeri; Antonio Carlos Pereira
Journal:  Rev Saude Publica       Date:  2019-08-19       Impact factor: 2.106

5.  An overview of the methodological aspects and policy implications of willingness-to-pay studies in oral health: a scoping review of existing literature.

Authors:  Navid Saadatfar; Mohammad Pooyan Jadidfard
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2020-11-12       Impact factor: 2.757

6.  Prevalence of Missing Values and Protest Zeros in Contingent Valuation in Dental Medicine.

Authors:  Pedram Sendi; Arta Ramadani; Michael M Bornstein
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-07-06       Impact factor: 3.390

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.