Amalgam Alternatives: Cost-Effectiveness and Value of Information Analysis

被引:17
|
作者
Schwendicke, F. [1 ]
Goestemeyer, G. [1 ]
Stolpe, M. [2 ]
Krois, J. [1 ]
机构
[1] Charite Univ Med Berlin, Dept Operat & Prevent Dent, Berlin, Germany
[2] Kiel Inst World Econ, Kiel, Germany
关键词
decision making; economic evaluation; mathematical modeling; evidence-based dentistry/health care; restorative dentistry; permanent dental restoration; ROOT-CANAL TREATMENT; NETWORK METAANALYSIS; RESTORATIONS; OUTCOMES; COMPOSITE; SURVIVAL; CROWNS;
D O I
10.1177/0022034518782671
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of amalgam alternatives-namely, incrementally placed composites (IComp), composites placed in bulk (BComp), and glass ionomer cements (GIC). In a sensitivity analysis, we also included composite inlays (CompI) and incrementally placed bulk-fills (IBComp). Moreover, the value of information (VOI) regarding the effectiveness of all strategies was determined. A mixed public-private-payer perspective in the context of Germany was adopted. Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed to yield effectiveness estimates (relative risk [RR] of failure). A 3-surfaced restoration on a permanent molar in initially 30-y-old patients was followed over patients' lifetime using a Markov model. Restorative and endodontic complications were modeled; our outcome parameter was the years of tooth retention. Costs were derived from insurance fee items. Monte Carlo microsimulations were used to estimate cost-effectiveness, cost-effectiveness acceptability, and VOI. Initially, BComp/GIC were less costly (110.11 euros) than IComp (146.82 euros) but also more prone to failures (RRs [95% credible intervals (CrI)] were 1.6 [0.8 to 3.4] for BComp and 1.3 [0.5 to 5.6] for GIC). When following patients over their lifetime, IComp was most effective (mean [SD], 41.9 [1] years) and least costly (2,076 [135] euros), hence dominating both BComp (40.5 [1] years; 2,284 [126] euros) and GIC (41.2 years; 2,177 [126] euros) in 90% of simulations. Eliminating the uncertainty around the effectiveness of the strategies was worth 3.99 euros per restoration, translating into annual economic savings of 87.8 million euros for payers. Including CompI and IBComp into our analyses had only a minimal impact, and our findings were robust in further sensitivity analyses. In conclusion, the initial savings by BComp/GIC compared with IComp are very likely to be compensated by the higher risk of failures and costs for retreatments. CompI and IBComp do not seem cost-effective. All alternatives are likely to be inferior to amalgam. The VOI was considerable, and future studies may yield significant economic benefits.
引用
收藏
页码:1317 / 1323
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Cost-effectiveness analysis of medical documentation alternatives
    Kopach, R
    Sadat, S
    Gallaway, ID
    Geiger, G
    Ungar, WJ
    Coyte, PC
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2005, 21 (01) : 126 - 131
  • [2] Cost-effectiveness of Prescribing Antidepressants by Baseline Severity and Value of Information Analysis
    Thom, Howard
    Welton, Nicicy
    Kendrick, Tony
    Lewis, Glyn
    JOURNAL OF MENTAL HEALTH POLICY AND ECONOMICS, 2015, 18 : S38 - S38
  • [3] Value engineering and cost-effectiveness analysis
    Gozhu, Han
    Xi Tong Gong Cheng Yu Dian Zi Ji Shu/Systems Engineering & Electronics, 1994, 16 (10):
  • [4] Statin Therapy in Rheumatoid Arthritis A Cost-Effectiveness and Value-of-Information Analysis
    Bansback, Nick
    Ara, Roberta
    Ward, Sue
    Anis, Aslam
    Choi, Hyon K.
    PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2009, 27 (01) : 25 - 37
  • [5] Cost-effectiveness of MS disease modifying agents: A Markov and value of information analysis
    Lundy, J
    Coons, SJ
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2006, 9 (03) : A82 - A82
  • [6] Statin Therapy in Rheumatoid ArthritisA Cost-Effectiveness and Value-of-Information Analysis
    Nick Bansback
    Roberta Ara
    Sue Ward
    Aslam Anis
    Hyon K. Choi
    PharmacoEconomics, 2009, 27 : 25 - 37
  • [7] Improving value measurement in cost-effectiveness analysis
    Ubel, PA
    Nord, E
    Gold, M
    Menzel, P
    Prades, JLP
    Richardson, J
    MEDICAL CARE, 2000, 38 (09) : 892 - 901
  • [8] Cost-effectiveness in rerestoring class II amalgam: Composite or amalgam.
    Tobi, H
    Kreulen, C
    Van Amerongen, E
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 1998, 77 : 964 - 964
  • [9] Treatment alternatives for hepatitis B cirrhosis: A cost-effectiveness analysis
    Kanwal, Fasiha
    Farid, Mary
    Martin, Paul
    Chen, Gary
    Gralnek, Ian M.
    Dulai, Gareth S.
    Spiegel, Brennan M. R.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY, 2006, 101 (09): : 2076 - 2089
  • [10] Treatment alternatives for hepatitis B cirrhosis: A cost-effectiveness analysis
    Kanwal, F
    Farid, M
    Martin, P
    Chen, G
    Gralnek, IM
    Dulai, GS
    Spiegel, BM
    HEPATOLOGY, 2005, 42 (04) : 351A - 351A