Thomas Davidson1,2, Caroline Blomma3, Mats Bågesund4, Barbro Krevers1, Martina Vall5, Elisabeth Wärnberg Gerdin6,7, Sofia Tranæus2,8. 1. Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 2. Health Technology Assessment - Odontology (HTA-O), Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden. 3. Public Dental Service Östergötland, and Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 4. Center for Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, Norrköping, and Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden. 5. Malmö University Library, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden. 6. Odontological Research Unit, Public Dental Service, Region Örebro County, Örebro, Sweden. 7. School of Health and Medical Sciences, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden. 8. Department of Dental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of caries preventive interventions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted, following the PRISMA Statement. Four electronic databases were searched (final search 16 March 2020). Studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria were independently critically appraised, by two reviewers in parallel. Data from each included study were extracted and tabulated: the analysis used a narrative approach to present the results of the estimated cost-effectiveness. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Twenty-six publications fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were of low or moderate risk of bias. Ten publications were economic evaluations, directly based on empirical studies, and the other 16 were modelling studies. Most of the studies concerned interventions for children and the most common were analyses of fluoride varnish and risk-based programs. Some of the studies showed both reduced cost and improved outcomes, but most studies reported that the improved outcome came with an additional cost. The results disclosed several cost-effectiveness evaluations of caries preventive interventions in the literature, but these target primarily children at high risk. There is a scarcity of studies specifically targeting adults and especially the elderly.
OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of caries preventive interventions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review was conducted, following the PRISMA Statement. Four electronic databases were searched (final search 16 March 2020). Studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria were independently critically appraised, by two reviewers in parallel. Data from each included study were extracted and tabulated: the analysis used a narrative approach to present the results of the estimated cost-effectiveness. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Twenty-six publications fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were of low or moderate risk of bias. Ten publications were economic evaluations, directly based on empirical studies, and the other 16 were modelling studies. Most of the studies concerned interventions for children and the most common were analyses of fluoride varnish and risk-based programs. Some of the studies showed both reduced cost and improved outcomes, but most studies reported that the improved outcome came with an additional cost. The results disclosed several cost-effectiveness evaluations of caries preventive interventions in the literature, but these target primarily children at high risk. There is a scarcity of studies specifically targeting adults and especially the elderly.
Authors: Thomas Davidson; Eva-Karin Bergström; Magnus Husberg; Ulla Moberg Sköld Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-10 Impact factor: 3.390