Cost-effectiveness analysis of two attachment systems for mandibular overdenture.
ball abutment
cost-effectiveness
denture maintenance
locator abutment
mandibular overdenture
Journal
Clinical oral implants research
ISSN: 1600-0501
Titre abrégé: Clin Oral Implants Res
Pays: Denmark
ID NLM: 9105713
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2020
Jul 2020
Historique:
received:
31
10
2019
revised:
05
03
2020
accepted:
12
03
2020
pubmed:
27
3
2020
medline:
3
7
2020
entrez:
27
3
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
This study analysed the cost-effectiveness of two different attachments for the 2-implant overdenture (2IOD) in edentulous mandibles. When considering alternative treatments, cost-effectiveness analysis is an important factor for stakeholders (patient, clinician, social security, insurance company, etc.). A general practice population (n = 116) was treated between 2003 and 2013 with a mandibular 2IOD with 2 different ball/stud attachment systems, one spherical (Group D) and one cylindrical (Group L). Patient well-being was assessed with OHIP-14-Total (OHIP-14-T), at intake and annually up to 5 years, to calculate the health effect. Initial and maintenance costs of both treatments were inventoried. The cost-effectiveness was compared. Annual discount rates of 4% and 1.5% were applied to future costs and health outcomes, following Dutch guidelines. Prices were adjusted to the year 2003. To offset the uncertainty in relevant input parameters, a sensitivity analysis was performed using bootstrap analysis. Significance was set at p < .05. The health effect was 6.36 (SD 5.32) for Group D and 8.54 (SD 5.63) for Group L. The sum of the discounted costs up to 5 years was EUR 4,210.98 (SD 634.75) for the D and EUR 3,840.62 (SD 302.63) for the Group L (p = .005). The bootstrapping reports that L abutment clearly dominates the D abutment in terms of cost-effectiveness. The 2IOD on the L abutment is dominant compared to the 2IOD on D abutment, in a 5-year perspective.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32212393
doi: 10.1111/clr.13599
pmc: PMC7386928
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
615-624Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Clinical Oral Implants Research published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
J Dent Res. 2007 Mar;86(3):276-80
pubmed: 17314262
Med Decis Making. 1998 Apr-Jun;18(2 Suppl):S68-80
pubmed: 9566468
BMC Oral Health. 2007 Dec 06;7:17
pubmed: 18053267
J Dent Res. 2013 Dec;92(12 Suppl):183S-8S
pubmed: 24158338
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Oct 11;10:CD008001
pubmed: 30308116
Int J Prosthodont. 2004 Mar-Apr;17(2):181-6
pubmed: 15119869
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2019 Mar;30(3):218-228
pubmed: 30681193
J Dent Res. 2005 Sep;84(9):794-9
pubmed: 16109986
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2017 Oct;19(5):944-951
pubmed: 28703477
Int J Prosthodont. 2017 Jul/Aug;30(4):321-326
pubmed: 28697200
Health Econ. 1994 Sep-Oct;3(5):309-19
pubmed: 7827647
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Jul;36(7):745-758
pubmed: 29779120
J Public Health Dent. 2007 Fall;67(4):191-8
pubmed: 18087989
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 1997 Aug;25(4):284-90
pubmed: 9332805
JDR Clin Trans Res. 2018 Oct;3(4):346-352
pubmed: 30931785
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2020 Jul;31(7):615-624
pubmed: 32212393
J Adv Prosthodont. 2016 Feb;8(1):53-61
pubmed: 26949488
Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2018 Apr;46(2):118-124
pubmed: 28925508
J Dent Res. 2006 Aug;85(8):717-21
pubmed: 16861288
Gerodontology. 2002 Jul;19(1):3-4
pubmed: 12164236
Health Econ. 2001 Oct;10(7):675-80
pubmed: 11747050
Health Econ. 2001 Dec;10(8):779-87
pubmed: 11747057
Clin Implant Dent Relat Res. 2019 Oct;21(5):835-844
pubmed: 31454159
J Clin Periodontol. 2010 Oct;37(10):920-7
pubmed: 20727057
Br Dent J. 2009 Aug 22;207(4):185-6
pubmed: 19696851
Clin Oral Implants Res. 2015 Sep;26 Suppl 11:57-63
pubmed: 26077930