National Institute for Health Research.

Abstract:Background: Two-arm parallel group randomized controlled trial to measure the cost-effectiveness of caries prevention in caries-free children aged 2-3 years attending general practice.Methods: The setting was 22 dental practices in Northern Ireland. Participants were centrally randomized into intervention: 22,600 ppm fluoride varnish; toothbrush; 50 ml tube of 1,450 ppm fluoride toothpaste; and standardised prevention advice, and control: advice-only, both provided at 6-monthly intervals during 3-year follow-up. The primary outcome measure was conversion from caries-free to caries-active states assessed by calibrated and blinded examiners; secondary outcome measures included dmfs, pain and extraction. Cumulative costs were related to each of the trial's outcomes in a series of incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses examined the impact of using dentist's time as measured by observation rather than that reported by the dentist. The costs of applying topical fluoride were also estimated assuming the work was undertaken by dental nurses or hygienists rather than dentists. AbstractBackground: Two-arm parallel group randomized controlled trial to measure the cost-effectiveness of caries prevention in caries-free children aged 2-3 years attending general practice.Methods: The setting was 22 dental practices in Northern Ireland.Participants were centrally randomized into intervention: 22,600 ppm fluoride varnish; toothbrush; 50 ml tube of 1,450 ppm fluoride toothpaste;and standardised prevention advice, and control: advice-only, both provided at 6-monthly intervals during 3-year follow-up. The primary outcome measure was conversion from caries-free to caries-active states assessed by calibrated and blinded examiners; secondary outcome measures included dmfs, pain and extraction. Cumulative costs were related to each of the trial's outcomes in a series of incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs). Sensitivity analyses examined the impact of using dentist's time as measured by observation rather than that reported by the dentist. The costs of applying topical fluoride were also estimated assuming the work was undertaken by dental nurses or hygienists rather than dentists.Results: A total of 1248 children (624 randomised to each group) were recruited and 1096 (549 in the intervention group and 547 in the control group) were included in the final analyses.

BackgroundDental caries is the most common disease of childhood. The NHS guidelines promote preventative care in dental practices, particularly for young children. However, the cost-effectiveness of this policy has not been established.ObjectiveTo measure the effects and costs of a composite fluoride intervention designed to prevent caries in young children attending dental services.DesignThe study was a two-arm, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial, with an allocation ratio of 1 : 1. Randomisation was by clinical trials unit, using randomised permuted blocks. Children/families were not blinded; however, outcome assessment was blinded to group assessment.SettingThe study took place in 22 NHS dental practices in Northern Ireland, UK.ParticipantsThe study participants were children aged 2–3 years, who were caries free at baseline.InterventionsThe intervention was composite in nature, comprising a varnish containing 22,600 parts per million (p.p.m.) fluoride, a toothbrush and a 50-ml tube of toothpaste containing 1450 p.p.m. fluoride; plus standardised, evidence-based prevention advice provided at 6-monthly intervals over 3 years. The control group received the prevention advice alone.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome measure was conversion from caries-free to caries-active states. Secondary outcome measures were the number of decayed, missing or filled tooth surfaces in primary dentition (dmfs) in caries-active children, the number of episodes of pain, the number of extracted teeth and the costs of care. Adverse reactions (ARs) were recorded.ResultsA total of 1248 children (624 randomised to each group) were recruited and 1096 (549 in the intervention group and 547 in the control group) were included in the final analyses. A total of 87% of the intervention children and 85% of control children attended every 6-month visit (p = 0.77). In total, 187 (34%) children in the intervention group converted to caries active, compared with 213 (39%) in the control group [odds ratio (OR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 1.04;p = 0.11]. The mean number of tooth surfaces affected by caries was 7.2 in the intervention group, compared with 9.6 in the control group (p = 0.007). There was no significant difference in the number of episodes of pain between groups (p = 0.81). However, 164 out of the total of 400 (41%) children who converted to caries active reported toothache, compared with 62 out of 696 (9%) caries-free children (OR 7.1 95% CI 5.1 to 9.9;p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the number of teeth extracted in caries-active children (p = 0.95). Ten children in the intervention group had ARs of a minor nature. The average direct dental care cost was £155.74 for the intervention group and £48.21 for the control group over 3 years (p < 0.05). The mean cost per carious surface avoided over the 3 years was estimated at £251.00.LimitationsThe usual limitations of a trial such as generalisability and understanding the underlying reasons for the outcomes apply. There is no mean willingness-to-pay threshold available to enable assessment of value for money.ConclusionsA statistically significant effect could not be demonstrated for the primary outcome. Once caries develop, pain is likely. There was a statistically significant difference in dmfs in caries-active children in favour of the intervention. Although adequately powered, the effect size of the intervention was small and of questionable clinical and economic benefit.Future workFuture work should assess the caries prevention effects of interventions to reduce sugar consumption at the population and individual levels. Interventions designed to arrest the disease once it is established need to be developed and tested in practice.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN36180119 and EudraCT 2009-010725-39.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 71. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Abstract:Background: We conducted a parallel group randomised controlled trial of children initially aged 2-3 years who were caries free, to prevent the children becoming caries active over the subsequent 36 months.Methods: The setting was 22 dental practices in Northern Ireland and children were randomly assigned by a Clinical Trials Unit (using computer generated random numbers, with allocation concealed from the dental practice until child was recruited) to the intervention (22,600 ppm fluoride varnish, toothbrush, 50 ml tube of 1,450 ppm fluoride toothpaste and standardised, evidence-based prevention advice), or advice-only control, at 6-monthly intervals. The primary outcome measure was conversion from caries-free to caries-active states. Secondary outcome measures were dmfs in caries active children, number of episodes of pain, number of extracted teeth. Adverse reactions were recorded. Calibrated external examiners, blinded to the child's study group, assessed the status of the children at baseline and after 3 years. Results: 1248 children (624 randomised to each group) were recruited and 1,096 (549 intervention, 547 control) were included in the final analyses. 87% of intervention and 86% of control children attended every 6-month visit (P=0.77). 187 (34%) of intervention group converted to caries-active compared to 213 (39%) in control (OR 0.81, 95%CI 0.64 to 1.04; P=0.11). Mean dmfs of those with caries in intervention group was 7.2 compared to 9.6 in control group (P=0.007). There was no significant difference in the number of episodes of pain between groups, (P=0.81) or in the number of teeth extracted in caries-active children (P=0.95). Ten children in the intervention group had adverse reactions of a minor nature.Conclusion: This well conducted trial failed to demonstrate that the intervention kept children caries free, however there was evidence that once children get caries it slowed down its progression. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 Methods: The setting was 22 dental practices in Northern Ireland and children were randomly assigned by a Clinical Trials Unit (using computer generated random numbers, with allocation concealed from the dental practice until child was recruited)to the intervention (22,600 ppm fluoride varnish, toothbrush, 50 ml tube of 1,450 ppm fluoride toothpaste and standardised, evidence-based prevention advice), or adviceonly control, at 6-monthly intervals. The primary outcome measure was conversion from caries-free to caries-active states. Secondary outcome measures were dmfs in caries active children, number of episodes of pain, number of extracted teeth.Adv...

BackgroundAlcohol use in young people remains a public health concern, with adverse impacts on outcomes such as health, well-being, education and relationships.ObjectivesTo assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a combined classroom curriculum and parental intervention on self-reported alcohol use [heavy episodic drinking (HED)] and alcohol-related harms (indicators such as getting into fights after drinking, poorer school performance and trouble with friends and family).DesignA two-arm, cluster randomised controlled trial with schools as the unit of randomisation.SettingA total of 105 post-primary schools in Northern Ireland (NI) and Glasgow/Inverclyde Educational Authority areas.ParticipantsA total of 12,738 male and female secondary school students (intervention delivered when students were in school year 9 in NI or S2 in Scotland in the academic year 2012–13 and aged 12–13 years) were randomised. Randomisation and baseline (T0) surveys took place when children were in school year 8 or S1. Schools were randomised (1 : 1) by an independent statistician to the Steps Towards Alcohol Misuse Prevention Programme (STAMPP) or to education as normal (EAN). All schools were stratified by free school meal provision. Schools in NI were also stratified by school type (male/female/coeducational).InterventionsSTAMPP combined a school-based alcohol harm reduction curriculum [an adapted version of the School Health and Alcohol Harm Reduction Project (SHAHRP)] and a brief parental intervention designed to support parents in setting family rules around drinking. The classroom component comprised two phases delivered over 2 years, and the parental component comprised a standardised presentation delivered by a trained facilitator at specially arranged parent evenings on school premises. This was followed up a few weeks later by an information leaflet mailed to all intervention pupils’ parents highlighting the main points of the evening.Main outcome measures(1) Self-reported HED (defined as self-reported consumption of ≥ 6 units in a single episode in the previous 30 days for male students and ≥ 4.5 units for female students) assessed at 33 months from baseline (T3); and (2) the number of self-reported harms (harms caused by own drinking) assessed at T3.Data sourcesSelf-completed pupil questionnaires.ResultsAt final follow-up (T3), data were available for 5160 intervention and 5073 control pupils for the HED outcome, and for 5234 intervention and 5146 control pupils for the self-reported harms outcome. The intervention reduced self-reported HED compared with EAN (p < 0.001), but did not reduce self-reported harms associated with own drinking. The odds ratio for the intervention effect on HED was 0.596 (standard error 0.0596, 95% confidence interval 0.490 to 0.725). The mean cost of delivery per school was £818 and the mean cost per individual was £15. There were no clear cost savings in terms of service utilisation associated with the intervention. The process evaluation showed that the classroom component engaged and was enjoyed by pupils, and was valued by teachers. Schools, students, intervention trainers and delivery staff (teachers) were not blind to study condition. Data collection was undertaken by a team of researchers that included the trial manager and research assistants, some of whom were not blinded to study condition. Data analysis of primary and secondary outcomes was undertaken by the trial statistician, who was blinded to the study condition.LimitationsAlthough the classroom component was largely delivered as intended, there was very low attendance at the parent/carer event; however, all intervention pupils’ parents/carers received an intervention leaflet.ConclusionsThe results of this trial provide some support for the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of STAMPP in reducing heavy episodic (binge) drinking, but not in reducing self-reported alcohol-related harms, in young people over a 33-month follow-up period. As there was low uptake of the parental component, it is uncertain whether or not the intervention effect was accounted for by the classroom component alone.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN47028486.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full inPublic Health Research; Vol. 5, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The Public Health Agency of NI and Education Boards of Glasgow/Inverclyde provided some intervention costs. Diageo provided funds to print some workbooks. The remaining intervention costs were internally funded.