Malmö University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
A cost minimization analysis of early correction of anterior crossbite-a randomized controlled trial
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Skane University Hospital, Malmö.
Section of Insurance Medicine, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, and.
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Odontology (OD).
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Odontology (OD).
2016 (English)In: European Journal of Orthodontics, ISSN 0141-5387, E-ISSN 1460-2210, Vol. 38, no 2, p. 140-145Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

OBJECTIVE: Economic evaluations provide an important basis for allocation of resources and health services planning. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the costs of correcting anterior crossbite with functional shift, using fixed or removable appliances (FA or RA) and to relate the costs to the effects, using cost-minimization analysis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-two patients with anterior crossbite and functional shift were randomized in blocks of 10. Thirty-one patients were randomized to be treated with brackets and arch wire (FA) and 31 with an acrylic plate (RA). Duration of treatment and number and estimated length of appointments and cancellations were registered. Direct costs (premises, staff salaries, material, and laboratory costs) and indirect costs (the accompanying parents' loss of income while absent from work) were calculated and evaluated with reference to successful outcome alone, to successful and unsuccessful outcomes and to re-treatment when required. Societal costs were defined as the sum of direct and indirect costs. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment with FA or RA. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between FA and RA with respect to direct costs for treatment time, but both indirect costs and direct costs for material were significantly lower for FA. The total societal costs were lower for FA than for RA. LIMITATIONS: Costs depend on local factors and should not be directly extrapolated to other locations. CONCLUSION: The analysis disclosed significant economic benefits for FA over RA. Even when only successful outcomes were assessed, treatment with RA was more expensive. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was not registered. PROTOCOL: The protocol was not published before trial commencement.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oxford University Press, 2016. Vol. 38, no 2, p. 140-145
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-6924DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjv026ISI: 000374414300004PubMedID: 25940585Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84963960845Local ID: 21708OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-6924DiVA, id: diva2:1403878
Available from: 2020-02-28 Created: 2020-02-28 Last updated: 2024-06-17Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Fixed or removable appliance for early orthodontic treatment of functional anterior crossbite: evidence-based evaluations of success rate of interventions, treatment stability, cost-effectiveness and patients perceptions
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Fixed or removable appliance for early orthodontic treatment of functional anterior crossbite: evidence-based evaluations of success rate of interventions, treatment stability, cost-effectiveness and patients perceptions
2015 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Anterior crossbite with functional shift also called pseudo Class III isa malocclusion in which the incisal edges of one or more maxillaryincisors occlude with the incisal edges of the mandibular incisorsin centric relationship: the mandible and mandibular incisors arethen guided anteriorly in central occlusion resulting in an anteriorcrossbite.Early correction, at the mixed dentition stage, is recommended,in order to avoid a compromising dentofacial condition whichcould result in the development of a true Class III malocclusionand temporomandibular symptoms. Various treatment options areavailable. The method of choice for orthodontic correction of thiscondition should not only be clinically effective, with long-termstability, but also cost-effective and have high patient acceptance, i.e.minimal perceived pain and discomfort. At the mixed dentition stage,the condition may be treated by fixed (FA) or removable appliance(RA). To date there is insufficient evidence to determine the preferredmethod.The overall aim of this thesis was therefore to compare andevaluate the use of FA and RA for correcting anterior crossbitewith functional shift in the mixed dentition, with special referenceto clinical effectiveness, stability, cost-effectiveness and patientperceptions. Evidence-based, randomized controlled trial (RCT)methodology was used, in order to generate a high level of evidence.The thesis is based on the following studies:The material comprised 64 patients, consecutively recruited fromthe Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, Sweden and from one Public Dental Health Service Clinicin Malmö, Skane County Council, Sweden. The patients were nosyndrome and no cleft patients. The following inclusion criteria wereapplied: early to late mixed dentition, anterior crossbite affecting oneor more incisors with functional shift, moderate space deficiency inthe maxilla, no inherent skeletal Class III discrepancy, ANB angle>0º, and no previous orthodontic treatment. Sixty-two patients agreedto participate and were randomly allocated for treatment either withFA with brackets and wires, or RA, comprising acrylic plates withprotruding springs. Paper I compared and evaluated the efficiency of the two differenttreatment strategies to correct the anterior crossbite with anteriorshift in mixed dentition. Paper II compared and evaluated thestability of the results of the two treatment methods two years afterthe appliances were removed. In Paper III, the cost-effectiveness ofthe two treatment methods was compared and evaluated by costminimizationanalysis. Paper IV evaluated and compared the patient´sperceptions of the two treatment methods, in terms of perceived pain,discomfort and impairment of jaw function. The following conclusions were drawn from the results:Paper I• Anterior crossbite with functional shift in the mixed dentitioncan be successfully corrected by either fixed or removableappliance therapy in a short-term perspective.• Treatment time for correction of anterior crossbite withfunctional shift was significantly shorter for FA compared toRA but the difference had minor clinical relevance. Paper II• In the mixed dentition, anterior crossbite affecting one ormore incisors can be successfully corrected by either fixedor removable appliances, with similarly stable outcomes andequally favourable prognoses.• Either type of appliance can be recommended. Paper III• Correction of anterior crossbite with functional shift usingfixed appliance offers significant economic benefits overremovable appliances, including lower direct costs formaterials and lower indirect costs. Even when only successfuloutcomes are considered, treatment with removable applianceis more expensive. Paper IV• The general levels of pain intensity and discomfort were lowto moderate in both groups.• The level of pain and discomfort intensity was higher for thefirst three days in the fixed appliance group, and peaked onday two for both appliances.• Adverse effects on school and leisure activities as well asspeech difficulties were more pronounced in the removablethan in the fixed appliance group, whereas in the fixedappliance group, patients reported more difficulty eatingdifferent kinds of hard food.• Thus, while there were some statistically significant differences between patients´ perceptions of fixed and removableappliances but these differences were only minor and seemsto have minor clinical relevance. As fixed and removableappliances were generally well accepted by the patients, bothmethods of treatment can be recommended. Key conclusions and clinical implicationsFour outcome measures were evaluated: -success rate oftreatment, treatment stability, cost-effectiveness and patientacceptance, which is important from both patient and caregiver perspectives. It is concluded that both methods have highsuccess rates, demonstrate good long-term stability and are wellaccepted by the patients. Treatment by removable appliance isthe more expensive alternative. Thus, in the studies on whichthis thesis is based, fixed appliance emerges as the preferredapproach to correction of anterior crossbite with functionalshift in the mixed dentition.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Malmö University, Faculty of Odontology, 2015. p. 108
Series
Swedish Dental Journal : Supplement, ISSN 0348-6672 ; 238
Keywords
Bettfel, Tandreglering, Ortodonti, Orthodontics, Malocclusion
National Category
Dentistry
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-7734 (URN)19711 (Local ID)9789171046437 (ISBN)9789171046444 (ISBN)19711 (Archive number)19711 (OAI)
Available from: 2020-02-28 Created: 2020-02-28 Last updated: 2022-06-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Wiedel, Anna-PaulinaPetrén, SofiaBondemark, Lars

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Wiedel, Anna-PaulinaPetrén, SofiaBondemark, Lars
By organisation
Faculty of Odontology (OD)
In the same journal
European Journal of Orthodontics
Dentistry

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 33 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf