4.4 Article

Did Expanded Dental Insurance Improve Chewing Ability in the Older Korean Population? Results of an Interrupted Time-series Analysis

期刊

JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 32, 期 5, 页码 215-220

出版社

JAPAN EPIDEMIOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.2188/jea.JE20200417

关键词

dental insurance; chewing ability; interrupted time-series analysis; quasi-experimental; older adults; causal inference

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examined the impact of dental insurance coverage for older adults in Korea. The results showed a decrease in chewing difficulty in the study population but it could not be attributed solely to the insurance extension.
Background: In 2012, the Korean National Health Insurance extended its coverage to include denture services for older adults. We examined whether the new policy resulted in improved chewing ability in the eligible population. Methods: We used interrupted time-series (ITS) analysis, a quasi-experimental design, to analyze the effect of the policy. We used data from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey conducted from 2007 to 2016-2018. The study population consisted of two groups: the treatment group, aged 65 years or older and eligible for the dental insurance benefit; and the control group, those younger than 65 years and ineligible. The main evaluated outcome was self-reported chewing difficulty. Results: The ITS analysis showed that chewing difficulty decreased annually by 0.93% (95% CI, -1.30 to -0.55%) and 0.38% (95% CI. -0.59 to -0.16%) after the policy extension in the older than 65 and younger than 65 groups. respectively. however. we could not conclude that the insurance extension affected chewing difficulty because there was a decrease in the control group as well. Conclusion: Chewing ability improved in both older and younger adults regardless of dental insurance coverage for older adults. Other exogenous factors probably led to the improvements in chewing ability as well as dental insurance benefits.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据