Cargando…

Economic Evaluation of a School-based Combined Program with a Targeted Pit and Fissure Sealant and Fluoride Mouth Rinse in Japan

BACKGROUND: In Niigata prefecture, Japan, a system has been developed based on a school-based fluoride mouth rinse program as follows; students with caries susceptible teeth are screened in a school dental examination, and encouraged to receive sealant placement in local dental clinics. However, the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sakuma, Shihoko, Yoshihara, Akihiro, Miyazaki, Hideo, Kobayashi, Seigo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Bentham Open 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3111721/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21673833
http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874210601004010230
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: In Niigata prefecture, Japan, a system has been developed based on a school-based fluoride mouth rinse program as follows; students with caries susceptible teeth are screened in a school dental examination, and encouraged to receive sealant placement in local dental clinics. However, the cost-effectiveness of sealant application in the public health has been questioned. The aim of this study was to estimate of the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit ratio for a school-based combined program with fluoride mouth rinse and targeted fissure sealant in children residing in non-fluoridated areas in Japan. PARTICIPANTS: The analysis was based on comparing an intervention group with two cohorts in the 8-year-old (n=66) and 11-year-old (n=58) participating in the combined program for four and seven years, respectively, with a control group of the same grades (n=43 and n=54 respectively). METHODS: The study measured mean differences in number of decayed and filled teeth (DFT) between the study groups and a combined program cost per child during study periods. The cost-effectiveness ratio was expressed as an individual annual program cost per DFT averted. In the cost-benefit ratio the mean difference in treatment cost between groups (program benefit) was compared to program cost. RESULTS: The mean reduced DFT differences between groups were 1.44 in 8-year-old and 3.17 in 11-year-old children. The cost-effectiveness ratio was ¥ 493 in the 8-year-old and ¥ 202 in the 11-year-old, respectively. The cost-benefit ratio was 1.84 in 8-year-old children and 2.42 in 11-year-old. CONCLUSION: This combined program indicated acceptable cost-effectiveness and cost –benefit ratio.