Long-Term Treatment Costs Associated with Implant-Supported Mandibular Prostheses in Edentulous Patients

/Home/Dental Implants (Prosthodontics)/Dental Implants (Prosthodontics)Articles & Reports/Group 5

Long-Term Treatment Costs Associated with Implant-Supported Mandibular Prostheses in Edentulous Patients
2005
Nikolai J. Attard, BChD, MSc, PhD/George A. Zarb, BChD, DDS, MS, MS, FRCD(C)/Audrey Laporte, MA, PhD
International Journal of Prosthodontics March/April Volume 18, Issue 2
You can view the abstract online. A subscription is required to view the full text or it can be purchased online.
Purpose: The studyǃÙs aim was to report long-term costs in edentulous patients treated with mandibular implant-supported prostheses.
Materials and Methods: Ninety patients were divided into four groups based on the type of implant prosthesis (fixed or overdenture) and treatment year. Records were obtained from dental charts, and an economic analysis from the patientǃÙs perspective was conducted. Clinical time associated with various procedures was measured and applied to the four groups. Salary rates by age, occupation, and gender were used to value patientsǃ٠time. Direct clinical and time costs over 10 years were converted to 2002 Canadian dollars using the Consumer Price Index and discounted at a 3% rate. A sensitivity analysis at an equal salary rate was carried out to test the robustness of the time costs.
Results: Initial treatment and maintenance costs over the observation period were significantly higher for fixed compared to overdenture prostheses. A significant improvement in maintenance costs for the first patient group treated with fixed prostheses was observed over the follow-up period. Longer term (15 years) treatment costs for the initial two groups were significantly higher for the fixed group. The sensitivity analysis at an equal salary rate demonstrated the same trend: Time costs were significantly higher for the fixed groups.
Conclusion: Long-term treatment costs indicated that the mandibular overdenture was a less expensive treatment compared to the fixed implant prosthesis. Int J Prosthodont 2005;18:117ǃÏ123.