Cost-effectiveness of caries-preventive fluoride varnish applications in clinic settings among patients of low, moderate and high risk.

OBJECTIVES

The total body of evidence finds fluoride varnish effective to prevent caries. However, most trials were conducted in high-risk populations, with more recent trials on low-risk groups finding a lower efficacy. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of fluoride varnish application in clinic setting in populations with different caries risk.

METHODS

A mixed public-private-payer perspective in the context of German health care was performed using a lifetime Markov model. Effectiveness data were derived from an update of the most recent systematic Cochrane review and synthesized in three different risk groups according to control group caries increment via random-effects meta-analysis. Varnish was assumed to be applied twice yearly between age 6 and 18 years. Teeth with carious defects would be treated restoratively and could experience further follow-up treatments. Costs were deduced from German fee item catalogues. Monte Carlo microsimulations were used for to analyse lifetime treatment costs and caries increment (Euro/Decayed, Missing, Filled Teeth (DMFT)).

RESULTS

In low-risk groups, fluoride varnish was nearly twice as costly and minimally more effective (293 Euro, 8.1 DMFT) than no varnish (163 Euro, 8.5 DMFT). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was 343 Euro spent per avoided DMFT. The ICER was lower in medium-risk (ICER 93 Euro/DMFT) and high-risk groups (8 Euro/DMFT).

CONCLUSIONS

Application of fluoride varnish in the clinic setting is unlikely to be cost-effective in low-risk populations. There is the need to either target high-risk groups or to provide fluoride varnish at lower costs, possibly in nonclinic settings.