Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness of child caries management: a randomised controlled trial (FiCTION trial)

BACKGROUND: A three-arm parallel group, randomised controlled trial set in general dental practices in England, Scotland, and Wales was undertaken to evaluate three strategies to manage dental caries in primary teeth. Children, with at least one primary molar with caries into dentine, were randomise...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Homer, Tara, Maguire, Anne, Douglas, Gail V. A., Innes, Nicola P., Clarkson, Jan E., Wilson, Nina, Ryan, Vicky, McColl, Elaine, Robertson, Mark, Vale, Luke
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7011536/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32041605
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-020-1020-1
_version_ 1783496089689653248
author Homer, Tara
Maguire, Anne
Douglas, Gail V. A.
Innes, Nicola P.
Clarkson, Jan E.
Wilson, Nina
Ryan, Vicky
McColl, Elaine
Robertson, Mark
Vale, Luke
author_facet Homer, Tara
Maguire, Anne
Douglas, Gail V. A.
Innes, Nicola P.
Clarkson, Jan E.
Wilson, Nina
Ryan, Vicky
McColl, Elaine
Robertson, Mark
Vale, Luke
author_sort Homer, Tara
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A three-arm parallel group, randomised controlled trial set in general dental practices in England, Scotland, and Wales was undertaken to evaluate three strategies to manage dental caries in primary teeth. Children, with at least one primary molar with caries into dentine, were randomised to receive Conventional with best practice prevention (C + P), Biological with best practice prevention (B + P), or best practice Prevention Alone (PA). METHODS: Data on costs were collected via case report forms completed by clinical staff at every visit. The co-primary outcomes were incidence of, and number of episodes of, dental pain and/or infection avoided. The three strategies were ranked in order of mean cost and a more costly strategy was compared with a less costly strategy in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5%. RESULTS: A total of 1144 children were randomised with data on 1058 children (C + P n = 352, B + P n = 352, PA n = 354) used in the analysis. On average, it costs £230 to manage dental caries in primary teeth over a period of up to 36 months. Managing children in PA was, on average, £19 (97.5% CI: -£18 to £55) less costly than managing those in B + P. In terms of effectiveness, on average, there were fewer incidences of, (− 0.06; 97.5% CI: − 0.14 to 0.02) and fewer episodes of dental pain and/or infection (− 0.14; 97.5% CI: − 0.29 to 0.71) in B + P compared to PA. C + P was unlikely to be considered cost-effective, as it was more costly and less effective than B + P. CONCLUSIONS: The mean cost of a child avoiding any dental pain and/or infection (incidence) was £330 and the mean cost per episode of dental pain and/or infection avoided was £130. At these thresholds B + P has the highest probability of being considered cost-effective. Over the willingness to pay thresholds considered, the probability of B + P being considered cost-effective never exceeded 75%. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN (reference number ISRCTN77044005) on the 26th January 2009 and East of Scotland Research Ethics Committee provided ethical approved (REC reference: 12/ES/0047).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7011536
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70115362020-02-14 Cost-effectiveness of child caries management: a randomised controlled trial (FiCTION trial) Homer, Tara Maguire, Anne Douglas, Gail V. A. Innes, Nicola P. Clarkson, Jan E. Wilson, Nina Ryan, Vicky McColl, Elaine Robertson, Mark Vale, Luke BMC Oral Health Research Article BACKGROUND: A three-arm parallel group, randomised controlled trial set in general dental practices in England, Scotland, and Wales was undertaken to evaluate three strategies to manage dental caries in primary teeth. Children, with at least one primary molar with caries into dentine, were randomised to receive Conventional with best practice prevention (C + P), Biological with best practice prevention (B + P), or best practice Prevention Alone (PA). METHODS: Data on costs were collected via case report forms completed by clinical staff at every visit. The co-primary outcomes were incidence of, and number of episodes of, dental pain and/or infection avoided. The three strategies were ranked in order of mean cost and a more costly strategy was compared with a less costly strategy in terms of incremental cost-effectiveness. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3.5%. RESULTS: A total of 1144 children were randomised with data on 1058 children (C + P n = 352, B + P n = 352, PA n = 354) used in the analysis. On average, it costs £230 to manage dental caries in primary teeth over a period of up to 36 months. Managing children in PA was, on average, £19 (97.5% CI: -£18 to £55) less costly than managing those in B + P. In terms of effectiveness, on average, there were fewer incidences of, (− 0.06; 97.5% CI: − 0.14 to 0.02) and fewer episodes of dental pain and/or infection (− 0.14; 97.5% CI: − 0.29 to 0.71) in B + P compared to PA. C + P was unlikely to be considered cost-effective, as it was more costly and less effective than B + P. CONCLUSIONS: The mean cost of a child avoiding any dental pain and/or infection (incidence) was £330 and the mean cost per episode of dental pain and/or infection avoided was £130. At these thresholds B + P has the highest probability of being considered cost-effective. Over the willingness to pay thresholds considered, the probability of B + P being considered cost-effective never exceeded 75%. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was prospectively registered with the ISRCTN (reference number ISRCTN77044005) on the 26th January 2009 and East of Scotland Research Ethics Committee provided ethical approved (REC reference: 12/ES/0047). BioMed Central 2020-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7011536/ /pubmed/32041605 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-020-1020-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Homer, Tara
Maguire, Anne
Douglas, Gail V. A.
Innes, Nicola P.
Clarkson, Jan E.
Wilson, Nina
Ryan, Vicky
McColl, Elaine
Robertson, Mark
Vale, Luke
Cost-effectiveness of child caries management: a randomised controlled trial (FiCTION trial)
title Cost-effectiveness of child caries management: a randomised controlled trial (FiCTION trial)
title_full Cost-effectiveness of child caries management: a randomised controlled trial (FiCTION trial)
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness of child caries management: a randomised controlled trial (FiCTION trial)
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness of child caries management: a randomised controlled trial (FiCTION trial)
title_short Cost-effectiveness of child caries management: a randomised controlled trial (FiCTION trial)
title_sort cost-effectiveness of child caries management: a randomised controlled trial (fiction trial)
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7011536/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32041605
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12903-020-1020-1
work_keys_str_mv AT homertara costeffectivenessofchildcariesmanagementarandomisedcontrolledtrialfictiontrial
AT maguireanne costeffectivenessofchildcariesmanagementarandomisedcontrolledtrialfictiontrial
AT douglasgailva costeffectivenessofchildcariesmanagementarandomisedcontrolledtrialfictiontrial
AT innesnicolap costeffectivenessofchildcariesmanagementarandomisedcontrolledtrialfictiontrial
AT clarksonjane costeffectivenessofchildcariesmanagementarandomisedcontrolledtrialfictiontrial
AT wilsonnina costeffectivenessofchildcariesmanagementarandomisedcontrolledtrialfictiontrial
AT ryanvicky costeffectivenessofchildcariesmanagementarandomisedcontrolledtrialfictiontrial
AT mccollelaine costeffectivenessofchildcariesmanagementarandomisedcontrolledtrialfictiontrial
AT robertsonmark costeffectivenessofchildcariesmanagementarandomisedcontrolledtrialfictiontrial
AT valeluke costeffectivenessofchildcariesmanagementarandomisedcontrolledtrialfictiontrial