Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 1998 Winter;58(1):19-27.
doi: 10.1111/j.1752-7325.1998.tb02986.x.

Economic evaluation of a pit and fissure dental sealant and fluoride mouthrinsing program in two nonfluoridated regions of Victoria, Australia

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Economic evaluation of a pit and fissure dental sealant and fluoride mouthrinsing program in two nonfluoridated regions of Victoria, Australia

M V Morgan et al. J Public Health Dent. 1998 Winter.

Abstract

Objectives: This study assessed the cost effectiveness of a three-year school-based pit and fissure dental sealant and fluoride mouthrinsing program in two nonfluoridated regions in Victoria, Australia.

Methods: The analysis was based on a community intervention in five schools comparing an intervention group receiving the pit and fissure dental sealant, a weekly fluoride mouthrinsing, and an annual oral hygiene education session, with a control group receiving oral hygiene education only. The study measured mean differences in DMFS increments between study groups.

Results: The mean discounted DMFS difference in increment (DMFS avoided) between study groups was 1.22 DMFS over three years. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing intervention to control group varied between a net savings of $7.00 to a cost of $35.60 per DMFS avoided, depending on assumptions used in the analysis. Results were sensitive to assumptions on program effectiveness, dental examination rates, and baseline DMFS of students. The program became more cost effective with each successive year of the program.

Conclusions: The introduction of such a preventive program in nonfluoridated regions of Victoria will represent an efficient use of community resources. Policy issues that need consideration include whether to target areas where adolescents have a history of high dental disease experience, and whether dentists or auxiliaries are used as service providers. The need exists for a systematic evaluation (including an economic evaluation component) of dental prevention and treatment programs in Australia.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources