Cost/effectiveness analysis of treatment options for the rehabilitation of the total edentulous mandible

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundSeveral solutions are available for the rehabilitation of edentulous jaws. Each treatment option is characterised by specific advantages and drawbacks.ObjectiveThe aim of this research was to perform a cost‐effectiveness (CE) analysis of the main rehabilitative solutions of totally edentulous mandibles.MethodsDecision tree models were built using TreeAge Pro Healthcare 2021 software to compare the following strategies: Conventional Denture (CD), Overdenture retained by two implants (OD‐2), Overdenture retained by a bar on two implants (ODbar), Overdenture retained by 4 mini‐implants (ODmini) and Fixed denture supported by 4 implants (FD). Costs were estimated using data from public rate tables. Effectiveness measures were obtained from a meta‐analysis of literature data, normalising the different scales in 0–1 range. A value of 30 000€ per 1 normalised utility points was set as threshold of willingness to pay (WTP). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) with 1000 Monte Carlo Simulations was performed to characterise uncertainty.ResultsTotal costs ranged between 1804,40€ for CD and 10 008,80€ for FD rehabilitations, with an effectiveness of 0,69 and 0,95 normalised points (0–1 scale) for the two solutions. The ODbar resulted to be the most CE strategy at the established WTP value, with the highest Net Monetary Benefit (22 001,20€), followed by the OD‐2 rehabilitation (21 866,80€). PSA analysis confirmed the dominance of OD‐2 and ODbar strategies, confirming a net separation from the other alternatives.ConclusionOD stabilised by 2 implants could represent a good rehabilitative solution for patients with edentulous mandible, being a good trade‐off in terms of costs and effectiveness. Nevertheless, a standardised measure of oral health‐related quality of life is needed to obtain more reliable results.