Comparing epidemiologically estimated treatment need with treatment provided in two dental schemes in Ireland

2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10147/248632
Title:
Comparing epidemiologically estimated treatment need with treatment provided in two dental schemes in Ireland
Authors:
Guiney, Helena; Felicia, Patrick; Whelton, Helen; Woods, Noel
Citation:
BMC Oral Health. 2012 Aug 16;12(1):31
Issue Date:
16-Aug-2012
URI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-12-31; http://hdl.handle.net/10147/248632
Abstract:
Abstract Background Valid estimation of dental treatment needed at population level is important for service planning. In many instances, planning is informed by survey data, which provide epidemiologically estimated need from the dental fieldworkers’ perspective. The aim of this paper is to determine the validity of this type of information for planning. A comparison of normative (epidemiologically estimated) need for selected treatments, as measured on a randomly-selected representative sample, is compared with treatment actually provided in the population from which the sample was drawn. Methods This paper compares dental treatment need-estimates, from a national survey, with treatment provided within two choice-of-dentist schemes: Scheme 1, a co-payment scheme for employed adults, and Scheme 2, a ‘free’ service for less-well-off adults. Epidemiologically estimated need for extractions, restorations, advanced restorations and denture treatments was recorded for a nationally representative sample in 2000/02. Treatments provided to employed and less-well-off adults were retrieved from the claims databases for both schemes. We used the chi-square test to compare proportions, and the student’s t-test to compare means between the survey and claims databases. Results Among employed adults, the proportion of 35-44-year-olds whose teeth had restorations was greater than estimated as needed in the survey (55.7% vs. 36.7%;p <0.0001). Mean number of teeth extracted was less than estimated as needed among 35-44 and 65+ year-olds.Among less-well-off adults, the proportion of 16-24-year-olds who had teeth extracted was greater than estimated as needed in the survey (27.4% vs. 7.9%;p <0.0001). Mean number of restorations provided was greater than estimated as needed in the survey for 16-24-year-olds (3.0 vs. 0.9; p <0.0001) and 35-44-year-olds (2.7 vs. 1.4;p <0.01). Conclusions Significant differences were found between epidemiologically estimated need and treatment provided for selected treatments, which may be accounted for by measurement differences. The gap between epidemiologically estimated need and treatment provided seems to be greatest for less-well-off adults.
Item Type:
Journal Article

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorGuiney, Helena-
dc.contributor.authorFelicia, Patrick-
dc.contributor.authorWhelton, Helen-
dc.contributor.authorWoods, Noel-
dc.date.accessioned2012-10-12T14:43:58Z-
dc.date.available2012-10-12T14:43:58Z-
dc.date.issued2012-08-16-
dc.identifier.citationBMC Oral Health. 2012 Aug 16;12(1):31-
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6831-12-31-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10147/248632-
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background Valid estimation of dental treatment needed at population level is important for service planning. In many instances, planning is informed by survey data, which provide epidemiologically estimated need from the dental fieldworkers’ perspective. The aim of this paper is to determine the validity of this type of information for planning. A comparison of normative (epidemiologically estimated) need for selected treatments, as measured on a randomly-selected representative sample, is compared with treatment actually provided in the population from which the sample was drawn. Methods This paper compares dental treatment need-estimates, from a national survey, with treatment provided within two choice-of-dentist schemes: Scheme 1, a co-payment scheme for employed adults, and Scheme 2, a ‘free’ service for less-well-off adults. Epidemiologically estimated need for extractions, restorations, advanced restorations and denture treatments was recorded for a nationally representative sample in 2000/02. Treatments provided to employed and less-well-off adults were retrieved from the claims databases for both schemes. We used the chi-square test to compare proportions, and the student’s t-test to compare means between the survey and claims databases. Results Among employed adults, the proportion of 35-44-year-olds whose teeth had restorations was greater than estimated as needed in the survey (55.7% vs. 36.7%;p <0.0001). Mean number of teeth extracted was less than estimated as needed among 35-44 and 65+ year-olds.Among less-well-off adults, the proportion of 16-24-year-olds who had teeth extracted was greater than estimated as needed in the survey (27.4% vs. 7.9%;p <0.0001). Mean number of restorations provided was greater than estimated as needed in the survey for 16-24-year-olds (3.0 vs. 0.9; p <0.0001) and 35-44-year-olds (2.7 vs. 1.4;p <0.01). Conclusions Significant differences were found between epidemiologically estimated need and treatment provided for selected treatments, which may be accounted for by measurement differences. The gap between epidemiologically estimated need and treatment provided seems to be greatest for less-well-off adults.-
dc.titleComparing epidemiologically estimated treatment need with treatment provided in two dental schemes in Ireland-
dc.typeJournal Article-
dc.language.rfc3066en-
dc.rights.holderHelena Guiney et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.-
dc.description.versionPeer Reviewed-
dc.date.updated2012-10-12T11:09:11Z-
All Items in Lenus,the Irish health repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.