Faculty of Odontology, Department of Endodontics, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden.
Department of Endodontology, Institute of Odontology, The Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Clin Exp Dent Res. 2021 Jun;7(3):385-398. doi: 10.1002/cre2.405. Epub 2021 Feb 16.
Direct cost for methods of prediction also named risk assessment in dentistry may be negligible compared with the cost of extensive constructions. On the other hand, as risk assessment is performed daily and for several patients in general dental practice, the costs may be considerable. The objective was to summarize evidence in studies of economic evaluation of prognostic prediction multivariable models and methods of caries and periodontitis and to identify knowledge gaps (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020149763).
Four electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, NHS Economic Evaluation Database) and reference lists of included studies were searched. Titles and abstracts were screened by two reviewers in parallel. Full-text studies reporting resources used, costs and cost-effectiveness of prediction models and methods were selected and critically appraised using a protocol based on items from the CHEERS checklist for economic evaluations and the CHARMS checklist for evaluation of prediction studies.
From 38 selected studies, six studies on prediction fulfilled the eligibility criteria, four on caries and two on periodontitis. As the economic evaluations differed in method and perspective among the studies, the results could not be generalized. Our systematic review revealed methodological shortcomings regarding the description of predictive models and methods, and particularly of the economic evaluation.
The systematic review highlighted a paucity of economic evaluations regarding methods or multivariable models for prediction of caries and periodontitis. Our results indicate that what we currently practice using models and methods to predict caries and periodontitis lacks evidence regarding cost-effectiveness.
与广泛的构建成本相比，牙科中预测方法（也称为风险评估）的直接成本可能微不足道。另一方面，由于风险评估在一般牙科实践中每天都会针对多个患者进行，因此成本可能相当可观。目的是总结有关预后预测多变量模型和龋齿及牙周病风险评估方法的经济评估研究中的证据，并确定知识空白（PROSPERO 注册号：CRD42020149763）。
检索了四个电子数据库（PubMed、Web of Science、The Cochrane Library、NHS 经济评估数据库）和纳入研究的参考文献列表。两名审查员平行筛选标题和摘要。选择并批判性地评估了报告预测模型和方法使用资源、成本和成本效益的全文研究，使用基于经济评估 CHEERS 清单和预测研究 CHARMS 清单的协议进行评估。
从 38 项选定研究中，有 6 项关于预测的研究符合入选标准，其中 4 项关于龋齿，2 项关于牙周病。由于经济评估在研究之间的方法和角度上存在差异，因此无法推广结果。我们的系统评价揭示了关于预测模型和方法，特别是经济评估的描述方面存在方法学缺陷。
系统评价强调了关于龋齿和牙周病预测的方法或多变量模型的经济评估不足。我们的结果表明，我们目前使用模型和方法预测龋齿和牙周病的做法在成本效益方面缺乏证据。
