再生根管治疗与 MTA 根尖加固的成本效益分析

IF 2.2 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
JDR Clinical & Translational Research Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-09 DOI:10.1177/23800844231191515
N Naved, F Umer, A R Khowaja
{"title":"再生根管治疗与 MTA 根尖加固的成本效益分析","authors":"N Naved, F Umer, A R Khowaja","doi":"10.1177/23800844231191515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>With the introduction of stem cell engineering in dentistry, regenerative endodontics has emerged as a potential alternative to mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) apexification in the management of necrotic immature permanent teeth. However, the utility of this modality in terms of cost-effectiveness has not yet been established. Therefore, we performed cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the dominant treatment modality that would influence decision making from the private payer perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Markov model was constructed with a necrotic immature permanent tooth in a 7-y-old patient, followed over the lifetime using TreeAge Pro Healthcare 2022. Transition probabilities were estimated based on the existing literature. Costs were estimated based on United States health care, and cost-effectiveness was determined using Monte Carlo microsimulations. The model was validated internally by sensitivity analyses, and face validation was performed by an experienced endodontist and health economist.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the base-case scenario, regenerative endodontics did not turn out to be a dominant treatment option as it was associated with an additional cost of USD$1,012 and fewer retained tooth-years (15.48 y). Likewise, in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, regenerative endodontics was again dominated by apexification against different willingness-to-pay values.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on current evidence, regenerative endodontic treatment was not cost-effective compared with apexification in the management of necrotic immature permanent teeth over an individual's lifetime.</p><p><strong>Knowledge transfer statement: </strong>The study provides valuable insight regarding the cost valuation and cost-efficacy of regenerative endodontic treatment versus apexification in the management of necrotic immature permanent teeth, as this would aid in effective clinical decision making, allowing for the functional allocation of resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":14783,"journal":{"name":"JDR Clinical & Translational Research","volume":" ","pages":"231-238"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Regenerative Endodontics versus MTA Apexification.\",\"authors\":\"N Naved, F Umer, A R Khowaja\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23800844231191515\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>With the introduction of stem cell engineering in dentistry, regenerative endodontics has emerged as a potential alternative to mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) apexification in the management of necrotic immature permanent teeth. However, the utility of this modality in terms of cost-effectiveness has not yet been established. Therefore, we performed cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the dominant treatment modality that would influence decision making from the private payer perspective.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A Markov model was constructed with a necrotic immature permanent tooth in a 7-y-old patient, followed over the lifetime using TreeAge Pro Healthcare 2022. Transition probabilities were estimated based on the existing literature. Costs were estimated based on United States health care, and cost-effectiveness was determined using Monte Carlo microsimulations. The model was validated internally by sensitivity analyses, and face validation was performed by an experienced endodontist and health economist.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the base-case scenario, regenerative endodontics did not turn out to be a dominant treatment option as it was associated with an additional cost of USD$1,012 and fewer retained tooth-years (15.48 y). Likewise, in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, regenerative endodontics was again dominated by apexification against different willingness-to-pay values.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on current evidence, regenerative endodontic treatment was not cost-effective compared with apexification in the management of necrotic immature permanent teeth over an individual's lifetime.</p><p><strong>Knowledge transfer statement: </strong>The study provides valuable insight regarding the cost valuation and cost-efficacy of regenerative endodontic treatment versus apexification in the management of necrotic immature permanent teeth, as this would aid in effective clinical decision making, allowing for the functional allocation of resources.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14783,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JDR Clinical & Translational Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"231-238\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JDR Clinical & Translational Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23800844231191515\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JDR Clinical & Translational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23800844231191515","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介随着干细胞工程在牙科中的应用,再生牙髓病学已成为治疗坏死未成熟恒牙的一种潜在替代方法,可替代三氧化氢矿物质聚合体(MTA)根尖治疗。然而,这种方法在成本效益方面的实用性尚未确定。因此,我们进行了成本效益分析,以确定从私人支付方的角度来看会影响决策的主要治疗方式:方法:我们使用 TreeAge Pro Healthcare 2022 建立了一个马尔可夫模型,对一名 7 岁患者坏死的未成熟恒牙进行终生跟踪。过渡概率根据现有文献进行估算。成本根据美国医疗保健估算,成本效益则通过蒙特卡罗微观模拟确定。该模型通过敏感性分析进行了内部验证,并由一位经验丰富的牙髓病学家和卫生经济学家进行了表面验证:结果:在基础方案中,再生根管治疗并不是一个主要的治疗方案,因为它的额外费用为 1 012 美元,而固位牙年数(15.48 年)却更少。同样,在概率敏感性分析中,根据不同的支付意愿值,再生根管治疗再次被根尖修复所取代:根据目前的证据,在个人一生中对坏死的未成熟恒牙进行治疗时,再生根管治疗与根尖修复相比并不划算:这项研究就牙髓再生治疗与先端修复在治疗坏死性未成熟恒牙方面的成本评估和成本效益提供了有价值的见解,因为这将有助于有效的临床决策,实现资源的功能性分配。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Regenerative Endodontics versus MTA Apexification.

Introduction: With the introduction of stem cell engineering in dentistry, regenerative endodontics has emerged as a potential alternative to mineral trioxide aggregate (MTA) apexification in the management of necrotic immature permanent teeth. However, the utility of this modality in terms of cost-effectiveness has not yet been established. Therefore, we performed cost-effectiveness analysis to determine the dominant treatment modality that would influence decision making from the private payer perspective.

Methods: A Markov model was constructed with a necrotic immature permanent tooth in a 7-y-old patient, followed over the lifetime using TreeAge Pro Healthcare 2022. Transition probabilities were estimated based on the existing literature. Costs were estimated based on United States health care, and cost-effectiveness was determined using Monte Carlo microsimulations. The model was validated internally by sensitivity analyses, and face validation was performed by an experienced endodontist and health economist.

Results: In the base-case scenario, regenerative endodontics did not turn out to be a dominant treatment option as it was associated with an additional cost of USD$1,012 and fewer retained tooth-years (15.48 y). Likewise, in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, regenerative endodontics was again dominated by apexification against different willingness-to-pay values.

Conclusion: Based on current evidence, regenerative endodontic treatment was not cost-effective compared with apexification in the management of necrotic immature permanent teeth over an individual's lifetime.

Knowledge transfer statement: The study provides valuable insight regarding the cost valuation and cost-efficacy of regenerative endodontic treatment versus apexification in the management of necrotic immature permanent teeth, as this would aid in effective clinical decision making, allowing for the functional allocation of resources.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JDR Clinical & Translational Research
JDR Clinical & Translational Research DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
期刊介绍: JDR Clinical & Translational Research seeks to publish the highest quality research articles on clinical and translational research including all of the dental specialties and implantology. Examples include behavioral sciences, cariology, oral & pharyngeal cancer, disease diagnostics, evidence based health care delivery, human genetics, health services research, periodontal diseases, oral medicine, radiology, and pathology. The JDR Clinical & Translational Research expands on its research content by including high-impact health care and global oral health policy statements and systematic reviews of clinical concepts affecting clinical practice. Unique to the JDR Clinical & Translational Research are advances in clinical and translational medicine articles created to focus on research with an immediate potential to affect clinical therapy outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信