Show simple item record

Utilities of dentin regeneration among insured and uninsured adults

dc.contributor.authorIsmail, Amid I.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBirch, Stephenen_US
dc.contributor.authorSohn, Woosungen_US
dc.contributor.authorLepkowski, James M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBelli, Robert F.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-01T21:18:08Z
dc.date.available2010-06-01T21:18:08Z
dc.date.issued2004-02en_US
dc.identifier.citationIsmail, Amid I.; Birch, Stephen; Sohn, Woosung; Lepkowski, James M.; Belli, Robert F. (2004). "Utilities of dentin regeneration among insured and uninsured adults." Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology 32(1): 55-66. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/74372>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0301-5661en_US
dc.identifier.issn1600-0528en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/74372
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=14961841&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstract –  Objectives:  This population-based study measured utilities (preferences measured under conditions of uncertainty) of dentin regeneration (DR), a potential new therapy, root canal therapy (RCT), and extraction (EXT). Methods:  A representative sample of dentate adults (aged 18–69 years) was randomly selected from the Detroit area. A computer program was used to administer the standard gamble (SG) method and record utility score (US) for treatment options of a tooth with reversible pulpitis using the SG method. For the SG method, two anchor states were used: filled tooth with full oral health and filled tooth with severe and continuous pain leading to EXT. Additional data were obtained using a self-administered questionnaire. Results:  Out of the 807 adults who resided in 446 screened and selected households, a final sample of 630 adults who resided in 368 households were interviewed. The mean US for DR with 75 and 95% success rates were 72.5 and 86.2 (on a 0–100 scale), respectively. The US for RCT and immediate EXT were 75.6 and 31.3, respectively. Eleven per cent of the adults valued DR with 95% success probability higher than a simple filling with full oral health for life. There were no statistically significant differences in the average US of DR between insured and uninsured adults. Factors such as gender, race, education, income and insurance status, experiences with EXTs or root canal treatment, regularity of dental visits, quality of life, and quality of oral health were not significantly associated with the scores of DR. There was, however, a small but significant interaction between race and dental insurance, and race and gender. Conclusion:  This population-based study found that DR was highly preferred to other standard treatment options.en_US
dc.format.extent198666 bytes
dc.format.extent3109 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherMunksgaard International Publishersen_US
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.rights© Blackwell Munksgaard 2004en_US
dc.subject.otherDecision Makingen_US
dc.subject.otherDental Enamel Proteinsen_US
dc.subject.otherEndodonticsen_US
dc.subject.otherQuality of Lifeen_US
dc.subject.otherRegenerationen_US
dc.subject.otherTooth Extractionen_US
dc.titleUtilities of dentin regeneration among insured and uninsured adultsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelDentistryen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumSchool of Dentistry, D2361, University of Michigan, 1011 N. University, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1078, USA,en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, MacMaster University, 1200 Main St. West, HSC 3H30, Hamilton, Ont., Canada L8N 3Z5,en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherInstitute for Social Research, 426 Thompson Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48104-1248,en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Psychology, 238 Burnett Hall, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE 68588-0308, USAen_US
dc.identifier.pmid14961841en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/74372/1/j.1600-0528.2004.00127.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1600-0528.2004.00127.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceCommunity Dentistry and Oral Epidemiologyen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBirch S, Ismail AI. Patient preferences and the measurement of utilities in the evaluation of dental technologies. J Dent Res 2002; 8: 446 – 50.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVon Neuman J, Morgenstern O. Theory of games and economic behaviour. New York: Wiley; 1953.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceTorrance G. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal: a review. J Health Econ 1986; 5: 1 – 30.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDonaldson C, Shackley P, Abdalla M. Using willingness to pay to value close substitutes: carrier screening for cystic fibrosis revisited. Health Econ 1997; 6: 145 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrazier J, Deverill M, Green C, Harper R, Booth A. A review of the use of health status measures in economic evaluation. Health Tech Assess 1999; 3: 1 – 164.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAntczak-Boukoms A, Weinstein M. Cost effectiveness analysis of periodontal disease control. J Dent Res 1987; 66: 1630 – 5.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBirch S. Measuring dental health: improvements on the DMF index. Community Dent Health 1986; 3: 303 – 11.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJacobson J, Maxson B, Mays K, Peebles J, Kowalski C. Cost effectiveness of dental implants: a utility analysis. J Dent Educ 1990; 54: 688 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSheiham A, Maizels S, Maizels A. New composite indicators of dental health. Community Dent Health 1987; 4: 407 – 14.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWhite BA, Caplan DJ, Weintraub JA. A quarter century of changes in oral health in the United States. J Dent Educ 1995; 75 ( Spec Iss ): 19 – 95.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLang W, Borgnake W, Taylor G, Woolfolk M, Ronis D, Nyquist L. Evaluation and use of an index of oral health status. J Public Health Dent 1997; 57: 233 – 42.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBennett KJ, Torrance GW. Measuring health state preferences and utilities: rating scale, time trade-off, and standard gamble technique. In: Spikler B, editor. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials, 2nd edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 1996. p. 256 – 65.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLazarski MP, Walker WA, Flores CM, Schindler WG, Hargreaves KM. Epidemiological evaluation of the outcomes of nonsurgical root canal treatment in a large cohort of insured dental patients. J Endod 2001; 27: 791 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSlavkin H. Fiscal year 1999. President's budget justification estimates for appropriations committees. Washington, DC: National Institute of Dental Research; February 2, 1998.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEklund SA. Changing treatment patterns. JADA 1999; 130: 1707 – 12.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLoewenstein GF, Weber EU, Hsee CK, Welch N. Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull 2001; 127: 267 – 86.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLoewenstein GF. The creative destruction of decision research. J Consumer Res 2001; 28: 499 – 505.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBirch S, Sohn W, Ismail AI, Lepkowski JM. Willingness to pay for dentin regeneration in a sample of the general public. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2003 (submitted).en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.