Aim: The aim of this cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), performed from a societal perspective, was to compare costs and consequences of an...
Aim: The aim of this cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), performed from a societal perspective, was to compare costs and consequences of an individually-tailored oral health educational programme (ITOHEP) based on cognitive-behavioural strategies integrated in non-surgical periodontal treatment compared with a standard treatment programme (ST).
Material and Methods: A randomised (n=113), evaluator-blinded, controlled trial, with two different active treatments, was analysed with respect to their costs and consequences 12-month after non-surgical treatment. Costs referred to both treatment costs and costs contributed by the patient. Consequences (outcome) was expressed as the proportion of individuals classified as having reached the preset criteria for treatment success after non-surgical treatment (”successful-NSPT”).
Results: More individuals in the ITOHEP group reached the preset criteria for treatment success than individuals in the ST group did. The CEA revealed an incremental cost-effectiveness of SEK 1724 [€191.09; SEK 9.02 = €1 (January 2007)] per “successful-NSPT” case, of which treatment costs represented SEK 1189 (€131.82), using the unit cost for a dental hygienist.
Conclusion: The incremental costs per “successful-NSPT” case can be considered as low and strengthens the suggestion that an individually tailored oral health educational programme integrated in non-surgical periodontal treatment is preferable to a standardised education programme.