Retaining or replacing molars with furcation involvement: a cost‐effectiveness comparison of different strategies

Abstract

Based on available data and within its limitations, our study indicates that retaining FI molars via periodontal treatments might be more cost-effective than replacing them via ISCs. Changes in the underlying evidence or the setting might alter these results.

Retention costs of periodontally compromised molars in a German population

“…, Schwendicke et al. ). Since the majority of German patients (86%) are enrolees of the public, not the private insurance (GKV‐Spitzenverband, ), we performed a sensitivity analysis to assess the cost‐effectiveness in publically insured patients.…”

Secondary Treatment for Asymptomatic Root Canal Treated Teeth: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis

“…A private-payer perspective was adopted; costs were derived from the private item fee catalog (GOZ), which allows more detailed calculation than the public fee catalog and has been used for similar calculations (13,14).…”

In-Office Application of Fluoride Gel or Varnish: Cost-Effectiveness and Expected Value of Perfect Information Analysis

“…For privately insured patients, all items are drawn from GOZ, which limits the transferability of our findings to these patients. However, costs have been found to differ very limitedly when estimated from private instead of public catalog [Schwendicke et al, 2014[Schwendicke et al, , 2016. Costs for GOZ items are factorized to account for the complexity of and time needed for different procedures.…”

“…After placing of the restoration, the tooth was at risk for further complications, which had been estimated by previous studies, mainly using systematic reviews. The details of the estimation have been described elsewhere [Schwendicke et al, 2014;Schwendicke and Stolpe, 2014b]. First, the placed restoration was assumed to be at a certain risk for complications (e.g., fracture or secondary caries, leading to repair and/ or renewal, or placement of a crown).…”

“…the mean time a tooth was retained in the patient's mouth. Tooth retention was determined by the empirical probabilities of teeth transitioning from one health state to another (e.g., caries increment → restoration → restoration complication → re-restoration → further complications, needing, for example, restorative or endodontic treatments → extraction) [Schwendicke et al, 2014;Schwendicke and Stolpe, 2014b].…”