Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Dental Public Health, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Electronic address: tutinin@dental.ukm.my
  • 2 Department of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 3 International Centre for Casemix and Clinical Coding, Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • 4 Oral Health Division, Ministry of Health, Malaysia, Putrajaya, Malaysia
Value Health Reg Issues, 2014 May;3:117-123.
PMID: 29702916 DOI: 10.1016/j.vhri.2014.04.012

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the national public sector specialist periodontal program in the management of periodontal disease.
METHODS: This was a multicenter, time motion, prospective, economic evaluation study involving a total of 165 patients with periodontitis recruited from five selected specialist periodontal clinics. Treatment costs were measured in 2012 Malaysian ringgit (MYR) and estimated from the societal perspective using step-down and activity-based costing methods, and substantiated by clinical pathways. A cost-effectiveness analysis was done to compare the specialist periodontal program with a hypothetical scenario in which patients attend biannual dental visits only for regular dental check-up and scaling. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was defined as the difference in cost per gain in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and clinical attachment levels (CALs). One-way scenario-based sensitivity analyses were carried out to assess the uncertainty of inputs.
RESULTS: The average cost for managing patients with periodontitis was MYR 376 per outpatient visit and MYR 2820 per annum. Clinically, a gain of an average of 0.3 mm of CAL was attained at post-treatment (paired t test, P < .001). Patients gained an average of 3.8 QALY post-treatment (paired t test, P < .001). For cost-effectiveness analysis, the specialist periodontal program was more cost-effective than the hypothesized biannual dental visits, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of MYR 451 and MYR 5713 per additional QALY and millimeter CAL gained, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: It is very cost-effective for the public sector to provide specialist periodontal treatment for patients with periodontitis according to the World Health Organization criteria and when compared with conventional biannual dental treatment.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.