Cost-effectiveness analysis of prosthetic treatment with thermoplastic resin removable partial dentures
-
- Fueki Kenji
- Department of Removable Partial Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo
-
- Inamochi Yuka
- Department of Removable Partial Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo
-
- Yoshida-Kohno Eiko
- Department of Removable Partial Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo
-
- Wakabayashi Noriyuki
- Department of Removable Partial Prosthodontics, Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Tokyo Medical and Dental University, Tokyo
Search this article
Abstract
Purpose: The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of thermoplastic resin removable partial dentures (TR-RPDs) with metal clasp-retained removable partial dentures (MC-RPDs), from the patients’ perspective.<br> Methods: Patient-reported outcome measures (Oral health-related quality of life [OHRQoL], patient satisfaction, oral appearance) were assessed among 24 partially dentate subjects who completed a randomized crossover trial comparing TR-RPDs and MC-RPDs. The prosthetic treatment fee for patients was used as the direct cost. The cost of achieving a clinically minimum important difference (MID) in Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP) summary score, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICE R) for each outcome measure were determined.<br> Results: OHRQoL, patient satisfaction, and oral appearance was rated higher with TR-RPDs compared to MC-RPDs. The median cost of achieving a MID in OHRQoL with TR-RPDs ($698) was 6.5 times higher than that with MC-RPDs ($107). The ICER was $67 for the OHIP summary score, $195 for the satisfaction score, and $1,169 for the oral appearance rating.<br> Conclusions: Although TR-RPDs provide better OHRQoL, patient satisfaction, and oral appearance than MC-RPDs, the cost-effectiveness of TR-RPDs was inferior to MC-RPDs from the patients’ perspective.
Journal
-
- Journal of Prosthodontic Research
-
Journal of Prosthodontic Research 65 (1), 52-55, 2021
Japan Prosthodontic Society
