4.4 Article

Cost-effectiveness of pit and fissure sealing at schools for caries prevention in China: A Markov modeling analysis

期刊

CARIES RESEARCH
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000530377

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The China Children's Oral Disease Comprehensive Intervention Project provides free oral health examinations, pit and fissure sealants (PFS) application, and oral health education for children aged seven to nine years. The study found that expanding the coverage of PFS application is a more cost-effective strategy for caries prevention in China.
The World Health Organization states that the application of pit and fissure sealants (PFS) is an effective way to prevent dental caries. Estimates of potential health and economic impacts of PFS upon school-age children provide crucial evidence to support the extension of PFS coverage to all target populations. The China Children's Oral Disease Comprehensive Intervention Project was launched in 2009 to provide free oral health examinations, PFS application, and oral health education for children aged seven to nine years. However, the national-level health and economic impacts of the program are unclear. To provide higher-quality evidence at the national level in China, we developed a multi-perspective, multi-state Markov model to estimate the cost and effect of PFS application to prevent dental caries. The total cost of the PFS project was 2.087 billion CNY, which can prevent 16.06 million PFMs from caries lesions. Compared with no intervention, PFS application was cost-effective from payer and society perspectives (BCR=1.22 from the payer's perspective, BCR=1.91 from the societal perspective). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) from both perspectives was negative (-61.46 CNY from the payer's perspective, and -125.75 CNY from the societal perspective), indicating that PFS was cost-effective and cost-saving. Expanding the coverage of PFS application in school can be a more cost-effective strategy for caries prevention in China.

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