Cost-effectiveness analysis of burning mouth syndrome therapy

Efficacy of oral nystatin treatment for patients with oral mucosal dysesthesia but without objective oral mucosal manifestations and necessity of Candida culture test before oral nystatin treatment

Background/purpose

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusion

Treatment outcomes and related clinical characteristics in patients with burning mouth syndrome

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the treatment outcomes of medication therapies in patients with burning mouth syndrome (BMS) and to identify the clinical characteristics that may affect the efficacy of prescribed medications.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of 769 patients with oral burning sensations. Of these patients, 420 patients diagnosed as the primary BMS received an "Initial Approach" that involved a detailed explanation about its etiopathophysiology, self-care instruction, and use of an oral lubricant. Neuropathic medications were prescribed for 277 patients who did not respond to the initial approach. Clinical characteristics, prescribed medications, and changes in intensity of oral symptoms were reviewed.

RESULTS

Clonazepam was administered as the first-line medication. Alpha-lipoic acid (ALA), gabapentin, and nortriptyline were commonly administered in combination with clonazepam. More than two-thirds of the patients reported a marked improvement in oral symptoms after treatments with combination of neuropathic medications and ALA. The efficacies of the initial approach and clonazepam had significant positive associations with the initial intensity of oral symptoms and significant negative associations with depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Clonazepam therapy in combination with appropriate medications was effective for managing patients with BMS. The initial intensity of oral symptoms and psychological status were significantly associated with treatment outcomes.

Therapeutic Dose of Amitriptyline for Older Patients with Burning Mouth Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To assess the therapeutic dose and safety of amitriptyline and the outcome following treatment with amitriptyline among older patients with burning mouth syndrome (BMS).

METHODS

187 consecutive patients were prescribed amitriptyline as a first-line medication from April 2016 to September 2018 and followed-up for >1 month. Patients were divided into 3 groups: group 1, 113 patients aged <65 years; group 2, 52 patients aged between 65 and 74 years; and group 3, 22 patients aged 75 years or older. The visual analog scale (VAS), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Somatic Symptom Scale-8 (SSS-8), Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), and Short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) were used for analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients (17 in group 1, 10 in group 2, and 5 in group 3) stopped taking amitriptyline due to side effects. There were no differences among the groups with respect to sex; scores of VAS, PCS, and SSS-8; and drop-out ratio. There were no significant differences in the VAS, PCS, and PGIC scores among the groups after 1 month. The mean daily dose after 1 month was 20.4 ± 8.6 mg in group 1, 17.3 ± 8.7 mg in group 2, and 13.2 ± 5.8 mg in group 3; this difference was significant (p value = 0.003). About 76% of patients showed improvements in their symptoms (PGIC ≥ 3). About 90% of patients reported side effects. No serious side effects occurred.

CONCLUSION

The therapeutic dose of amitriptyline may be lower for older BMS patients than for younger patients.

Refractory burning mouth syndrome: clinical and paraclinical evaluation, comorbiities, treatment and outcome

BACKGROUND

Burning Mouth Syndrome (BMS) is a chronic pain condition characterized by persistent intraoral burning without related objective findings and unknown etiology that affects elderly females mostly. There is no satisfactory treatment for BMS. We aimed to observe the long-term efficacy of high velanfaxine doses combined with systemic and topical administered clonazepam in a particular subgroup of BMS patients who do not respond to current clinical management.

RESULTS

Eight (66.1 ± 6.2 years old females) out of 14 BMS patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were treated with venlafaxine (300 mg/d) and clonazepam (5 mg/d) for 35.4 ± 12.1 (mean ± SD) months. The average duration of the symptoms at baseline was 4.3 ± 1.4 years and the overall mean daily pain intensity score was 8.6 ± 1.3 (VAS); pain was in tongue and within the oral mucosa, accompanying by oral and facial dysesthesia. In five patients tasting was abnormal. All patients had positive history of concomitant primary headache. The average score of Hamilton Rating scale for Anxiety and Depression was 21 ± 4.2, and 26.1 ± 2.9, respectively. Previous ineffective treatments include anticonvulsants and anti-depressants. All patients responded (more than 50% decrease in VAS) after three months treatment (mean VAS 3.2 ± 2.2) with no remarkable adverse events.

CONCLUSION

BMS deserves bottomless psychiatric evaluation and management when current available treatments fail. Treatment with venlafaxine combined with topical and systemic clonazepam may be effective in refractory BMS cases but further investigation in a large-scale controlled study is needed to confirm these results.

Screw- vs. Cement-retained Implant-supported Prosthesis in Partially Edentulous Patients: An Oral Health Technology Assessment Report

Understanding the morbidity events, incidence, and cost associated with each type of retention system used for implant supported prosthesis will help the clinician in better decision making. This study assessed the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the screw- and cement-retained implant-supported single crown and fixed partial denture for the replacement of teeth in partially edentulous jaws, from a health services perspective. A systematic literature search conducted in 10 databases, complemented by 4 journal databases and International Association for Dental Research abstracts, identified 92 studies on the single crown and 40 studies on the fixed partial denture. Minor and major technical complication events, as well as failure events, were extracted from strong- and medium-quality studies. Studies based on similar designs were pooled with a random-effects Poisson regression model. A decision tree was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness over a 15-y period posttreatment. The initial and maintenance costs to treat technical complication events were based on an American Dental Association survey of 2011 to 2012. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to examine the uncertainty in the data input parameters. Clinical evidence generated from the meta-analysis suggested no statistical difference between the 2 retention systems. The cost-effectiveness is presented as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The evidence from this report suggests that cement retention is the more cost-effective strategy as compared with screw retention prosthesis. Knowledge Transfer Statement: Evidence generated by this study will help clinicians make an appropriate cost-effective treatment decision in choosing the retention system for partially edentulous patients.

An economic evaluation of maxillary implant overdentures based on six vs. four implants

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the present study was to assess the value for money achieved by bar-retained implant overdentures based on six implants compared with four implants as treatment alternatives for the edentulous maxilla.

METHODS

A Markov decision tree model was constructed and populated with parameter estimates for implant and denture failure as well as patient-centred health outcomes as available from recent literature. The decision scenario was modelled within a ten year time horizon and relied on cost reimbursement regulations of the German health care system. The cost-effectiveness threshold was identified above which the six-implant solution is preferable over the four-implant solution. Uncertainties regarding input parameters were incorporated via one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis based on Monte-Carlo simulation.

RESULTS

Within a base case scenario of average treatment complexity, the cost-effectiveness threshold was identified to be 17,564 € per year of denture satisfaction gained above of which the alternative with six implants is preferable over treatment including four implants. Sensitivity analysis yielded that, depending on the specification of model input parameters such as patients' denture satisfaction, the respective cost-effectiveness threshold varies substantially.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the present study suggest that bar-retained maxillary overdentures based on six implants provide better patient satisfaction than bar-retained overdentures based on four implants but are considerably more expensive. Final judgements about value for money require more comprehensive clinical evidence including patient-centred health outcomes.

Treatment of burning mouth syndrome with amisulpride

BACKGROUND

Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a frequently occurring disease characterized by a burning or painful sensation in the tongue and/or other oral sites without clinical mucosal abnormalities or lesions. Its etiopathology is unknown, although local, systemic, and psychological factors have been associated with BMS. The syndrome is multifactorial, and its management remains unsatisfactory. The purpose of this study was to obtain preliminary data regarding the efficacy and tolerability of amisulpride in BMS treatment.

METHODS

The subjects were treated with amisulpride (50 mg/day) for 24 weeks. Efficacy assessment included a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain intensity, the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D), the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HASM-A), and the Clinical Global Impression Scale-Efficacy Index (CGI-EI).

RESULTS

The treatment regimens resulted in a significant improvement in burning mouth symptoms from baseline at week 24, as indicated by the quantitative mean illness duration VAS score, HAM-D, and HAM-A. Amisulpride appears to be effective and patients show a rapid response to treatment. No serious adverse effects were encountered in these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Amisulpride is effective and well tolerated as a short-term treatment. It is particularly efficacious at the start of treatment and has shorter response latency. Double-blind placebo-controlled trials are needed for further assessment of the efficacy of amisulpride in BMS treatment.