Health economic evaluation of endodontic therapies

General dental practitioners' fees for root canal treatment, coronal restoration and follow-on treatment in the adult population in Sweden: A 10-year follow-up of data from the Swedish Dental Register

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the accumulated fees connected with root filling, permanent coronal restoration and follow-on treatment charged by Swedish dentists over a 10-11-year follow-up period. Furthermore, analyzing these fees with reference to the type of restoration, tooth group, and the root-filled teeth which survived compared to those requiring extraction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In 2009, the data register of the Swedish Social Insurance Agency recorded a total of 215,611 teeth as root-filled. The accumulated fees for each tooth encompassed the following interventions: initial root filling, coronal restorations, and follow-up treatments during the designated period. The outcomes were analyzed using descriptive and analytic statistics, including t tests and one-way analysis of variance. The fees are presented in Euros (€1 = SEK 8.94).

RESULTS

The total accumulated fees for root fillings amounted to 72 million Euros: the mean fee per root filled tooth was €333.6. The total mean fee over a 10-11-year period, comprising root canal treatment, coronal restorations, and any follow-up treatments, was €923.4. Root-filled teeth with indirect restorations presented a higher mean fee (€1 279.3) compared to those with direct restorations (€829.4) or those without specified restorations (€832.7; p < .001). Moreover, molars presented a significantly higher mean fee (€966.4) compared to premolars (€882.8) and anterior teeth (€891.3; p < .001). Lastly, the mean fee for extracted teeth was €1225.3, which was higher compared to those who survived the follow-up period (€848.0; p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Fees charged by general dental practitioners for root-filled teeth accumulate over time, probably due to the need for further treatment of the tooth. The total mean fee was significantly higher for molars and root-filled teeth with indirect restorations. However, an analysis of the total costs would require prospective clinical cost-effectiveness studies.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of full versus selective root canal retreatment

AIM

Selective root-canal retreatment has been proposed as an alternative to full retreatment in multirooted, root-canal-filled teeth with evidence of apical pathology, where only the affected root(s) is retreated. Whilst this option may save costs initially, failures and retreatments may compensate for these initial savings. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of full versus selective root-canal retreatment using data from a recent clinical pilot study, employing a modelling approach.

METHODOLOGY

A Markov model was constructed to follow up a previously root-canal treated maxillary molar with apical pathology on a single root (mesio-buccal), receiving either selective or full root-canal retreatment. A private-payer perspective in Dutch health care was adopted. Permanent molar teeth with apical lesions on the mesial root were simulated over the lifetime of initially 50-year-old patients. Teeth could have endodontic complications and require interventions such as retreatment or tooth extraction and replacement. Costs were calculated based on the Dutch dental fee catalogues. Monte-Carlo microsimulations were performed to assess lifetime costs and effectiveness (measured as tooth retention time), and the resulting cost-effectiveness. Probabilistic joint uncertainty and sensitivity analyses were performed, and cost-effectiveness at different willingness-to-pay-thresholds was evaluated.

RESULTS

In the base-case scenario, selective retreatment was less costly (2137; 2.5%-97.5% percentiles: 1944-2340 Euro) and more effective (19.6; 18.3-20.8 Years) than full retreatment (2495; 2305-2671 Euro; 16.5; 15.2-17.9 Years) in 100% of the simulations and regardless of the willingness-to-pay threshold. Only in a worst case scenario was selective retreatment more costly, but remained more effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Selective retreatment, when clinically applicable, is likely to be more cost-effective than full retreatment in endodontically treated molars with persistent apical periodontitis. Our results should be interpreted with caution because the quality of the underlying data is limited.

Implications of root, pulp chamber, and canal anatomy on pulpotomy and revitalization procedures

OBJECTIVES

This review aims to discuss the implications of anatomy of the root, pulp chamber, and canals on pulpotomy and revitalization procedures (RPs) as treatment alternatives to root canal treatment procedures.

METHODS

This narrative review was undertaken to address two main questions - why remove vital pulp tissue in teeth with complex canal anatomy when it can be preserved? And why replace the necrotic pulp in teeth with mature roots with a synthetic material when we can revitalize? This review also aims to discuss anatomical challenges with pulpotomy and revitalization procedures.

RESULTS

Maintaining the vitality of the pulp via partial or full pulpotomy procedures avoids the multiple potential challenges faced by clinicians during root canal treatment. However, carrying out pulpotomy procedures requires a meticulous understanding of the pulp chamber anatomy, which varies from tooth to tooth. Literature shows an increased interest in the application of RPs in teeth with mature roots; however, to date, the relation between the complexity of the root canal system and outcomes of RPs in necrotic multi-rooted teeth with mature roots is unclear and requires further robust comparative research and long-term follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Whenever indicated, pulpotomy procedures are viable treatment options for vital teeth with mature roots; however, comparative, adequately powered studies with long-term follow-up are needed as a priority in this area. RPs show promising outcomes for necrotic teeth with mature roots that warrant more evidence in different tooth types with long-term follow-ups.  CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinicians should be aware of the pulp chamber anatomy, which is subject to morphological changes by age or as a defensive mechanism against microbial irritation, before practicing partial and full pulpotomy procedures. RP is a promising treatment option for teeth with immature roots, but more evidence is needed for its applications in teeth with mature roots. A universal consensus and considerably more robust evidence are needed for the standardization of RPs in teeth with mature roots.

Treatment of pulpal and apical disease: The European Society of Endodontology (ESE) S3-level clinical practice guideline

BACKGROUND

The ESE previously published quality guidelines for endodontic treatment in 2006; however, there have been significant changes since not only in clinical endodontics but also in consensus and guideline development processes. In the development of the inaugural S3-level clinical practice guidelines (CPG), a comprehensive systematic and methodologically robust guideline consultation process was followed in order to produce evidence-based recommendations for the management of patients presenting with pulpal and apical disease.

AIM

To develop an S3-level CPG for the treatment of pulpal and apical disease, focusing on diagnosis and the implementation of the treatment approaches required to manage patients presenting with pulpitis and apical periodontitis (AP) with the ultimate goal of preventing tooth loss.

METHODS

This S3-level CPG was developed by the ESE, with the assistance of independent methodological guidance provided by the Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany and utilizing the GRADE process. A robust, rigorous and transparent process included the analysis of relevant comparative research in 14 specifically commissioned systematic reviews, prior to evaluation of the quality and strength of evidence, the formulation of specific evidence and expert-based recommendations in a structured consensus process with leading endodontic experts and a broad base of external stakeholders.

RESULTS

The S3-level CPG for the treatment of pulpal and apical disease describes in a series of clinical recommendations the effectiveness of diagnosing pulpitis and AP, prior to investigating the effectiveness of endodontic treatments in managing those diseases. Therapeutic strategies include the effectiveness of deep caries management in cases with, and without, spontaneous pain and pulp exposure, vital versus nonvital teeth, the effectiveness of root canal instrumentation, irrigation, dressing, root canal filling materials and adjunct intracanal procedures in the management of AP. Prior to treatment planning, the critical importance of history and case evaluation, aseptic techniques, appropriate training and re-evaluations during and after treatment is stressed.

CONCLUSION

The first S3-level CPG in endodontics informs clinical practice, health systems, policymakers, other stakeholders and patients on the available and most effective treatments to manage patients with pulpitis and AP in order to preserve teeth over a patient's lifetime, according to the best comparative evidence currently available.

Cost-effectiveness of root canal treatment compared with tooth extraction in a Swedish Public Dental Service: A prospective controlled cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of root canal treatment (RCT) compared with a tooth extraction in a general dental practice setting, with reference to cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained over 1 year.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a prospective controlled cohort study based on patients either starting RCT or undergoing extraction at one of six Public Dental Service clinics in the county of Västra Götaland, Sweden. From a total of 65 patients, 2 comparable groups were formed: 37 started RCT and 28 underwent extraction. A societal perspective was used for the cost calculations. QALYs were estimated, based on the EQ-5D-5L given to the patients at their first treatment appointment and then after 1, 6, and 12 months.

RESULTS

The total mean cost of RCT ($689.1) was higher than for extraction ($280.1). For those patients whose extracted tooth was replaced, the costs were even higher ($1245.5). There were no significant intergroup differences in QALYs, but a significant improvement in health state values in the tooth-preserving group.

CONCLUSIONS

In the short term, extraction was cost-effective compared with preserving a tooth with RCT. However, the potential need for future replacement of the extracted tooth, by an implant, fixed prosthesis, or removable partial dentures, may change the calculation in favor of RCT.

Factors Associated with Patients' Rejection of Root Canal Treatment in a Tertiary Hospital, Southwest Nigeria: A Pilot Survey

Objective

Root canal treatment (RCT) is a major procedure in dentistry. It aims to relieve the pain of pulpal origin and maintain the affected tooth as a functional unit on the arch. Despite these achievable goals, RCT is sometimes rejected by patients. This study, therefore, sought to assess the reasons for rejection in patients planned for endodontic/RCT.

Materials and Methods

This was a cross-sectional pilot survey of patients planned for RCT using a self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire included sociodemographics, the Index for Dental Anxiety and Fear (IDAF-4C), and questions to assess the reasons for rejection of endodontic treatment. Data collected were analysed with IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences software program, version 23.0. Descriptive statistics were used; chi-square was used to test the association between categorical variables. Statistical significance was set at P ≤ 0.05.

Result

Thirty-one patients between the age range of 16 and 81 years, with a mean age of 38.16 ± 17.87, participated in the survey. Only nine (29.03%) of the participants declined to have the treatment. The majority 6(66.7%), and 7(77.8%) of those that refused the treatment did so, due to fear of drilling (P = 0.014) and cost of treatment (P = 0.001), respectively. Mean IDAF-4C was 1.86 ± 0.9 (standard deviation).The rejection was, however, not affected by past experience, the risk of taking multiple radiographs, and the number of hours or visits for the procedure.

Conclusion

The cost of treatment and fear of drilling were the major reasons for the rejection of RCT in this study. Therefore, there is a need to further look into making endodontic treatment a more comfortable, less costly, and less fear-provoking procedure for patients.

Vital pulp therapy for permanent teeth with diagnosis of irreversible pulpitis: biological basis and outcome

Root canal treatment (RCT) has been considered the conventional standard for the management of teeth with carious pulp exposure, particularly in mature teeth presenting with symptoms. Following a better understanding of the histopathology of deep carious lesions, the histology of the cariously exposed pulp and the healing potential of the inflamed pulp, vital pulp therapy (VPT) is increasingly adopted around the world for the management of permanent teeth with clinical signs and symptoms indicative of irreversible pulpitis. Furthermore, VPT became a recognized treatment modality by the European Society of Endodontology (ESE) and the American Association of Endodontists (AAE) by virtue of its high success rates reported in outcome studies using contemporary hydraulic calcium silicate-based cements. However, proper case selection, strict asepsis, capping materials and good coronal seal are mandatory for success. The aim of this paper is to review the biological basis for VPT in symptomatic teeth with carious pulp exposure and to report on the outcome of pulpotomy in teeth with clinical diagnosis of irreversible pulpitis.

Economic analysis of the different endodontic instrumentation techniques used in the Unified Health System

BACKGROUND

To assess the financial impact of incorporating a new (reciprocal) technology into endodontic treatments in the public health system (SUS).

METHODS

This was a economic evaluation study (comparing the 3 different endodontic instrumentation techniques-manual, rotary and reciprocating), allocative efficiency analysis to optimize existing resources in the SUS, and financial contribution impact analysis of incorporation of a new technology. Thirty-one (31) 12 years-old volunteers were evaluated.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated at R$1.34/min, - R$0.60/min and BRL 0.10/min for the single-rooted, bi-rooted and tri-rooted teeth, respectively, when the rotary technique was compared with the manual type. In turn, the ICER was R$ 21.04/min, - R$ 0.73/min and - R$ 2.81/min for the 3 types of teeth, respectively, when the reciprocating technique was compared with the manual type. The incremental financial impact of replacing manual endodontic with rotary endodontic treatments would be - R$ 2060963.66 in the case of single-rooted teeth, but the number of treatments would also be reduced (- 19,379). In the case of two-rooted teeth, the incremental financial impact would be BRL 34921540.62 with the possibility of performing an additional 204,110 treatments. In turn, BRL 11523561.50 represented the incremental financial impact for teeth with 3 or more roots and with an increase of 72,545 procedures. When we analyzed the incremental financial impact of replacing manual endodontic with reciprocating endodontic treatments, it would be - R$ 730227.80 in the case of single-rooted teeth, allowing for an additional 2538 treatments. In turn, R$ 21674853.00 represented the incremental financial impact for bi-radicular teeth, with an increase of 121,700 procedures. In the case of two-rooted teeth, the incremental financial impact would be BRL 13591742.90 with the possibility of performing an additional 40,670 treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

The reciprocating technique could improve access to endodontic treatment in the SUS as it allowed a simultaneous reduction in clinical time and associated costs. However, the higher number of endodontic treatments performed would have a financial impact.