Abstracts Presented At the EADPH Annual Congress on 13 September 2019

Abstracts Presented At the EADPH Annual Congress on 13 September 2019

doi: 10.1922/CDH_EAPDHAbstracts2019


The authors of the first four abstracts competed for the GSK research awards and gave 15 minute oral presentations they were: Abstract 4304 Potential cost-effectiveness of oral care in institutionalized older people: a health-economic evaluation WERBROUCK A.*, VERHAEGHE N. Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium SCHMIDT M., PUTMAN K. Department of Public Health, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussels, Belgium SIMOENS S. Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Science, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium Aim: There is need for optimized oral care in institutionalised older people. The aim of this health-economic evaluation was to evaluate cost-effectiveness of different alternatives for preventive and curative oral care in institutionalized older people. Methods: An age- and gender-specific Markov model was used to compare estimated costs and healthy oral years (HOYs) arising from four alternatives: (1) usual care; (2) in-house preventive care; (3) in-house preventive care + curative care in the community; and (4) in-house preventive care + in-house curative care. A healthcare payer perspective was adopted, the time horizon was 10 years, and the setting was Flanders (Belgium). Sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: Alternatives 2 and 3 were predominantly dominated by the two other alternatives. Thus, they were not considered relevant. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of in-house prevention + in-house curation (alternative 4) compared to usual care (alternative 1) was 1,132€ per HOY gained. The probability that an intervention would be cost-saving, compared to usual care, was less than 5% for all interventions. Conclusions: Several assumptions based on expert opinion were needed to populate the model. However, based on these findings it is recommended to adopt a policy which combines preventive and curative oral care, and consider in-house solutions for oral health care in institutionalized older people. In that case. It should be kept in mind that large investments are required at the beginning of the intervention, and that - given the older population and the high costs of oral health care - even in the long term it is unlikely that this intervention will become cost-saving. Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank Prof. Dr. Lieven Annemans (Ghent University) for his healtheconomic expertise and Dr. Barbara Janssens (Ghent University) and Prof. Dr. Joke Duyck (KU Leuven) for their expertise in oral care. The project was funded by “Vlaams Agentschap voor Zorg en Gezondheid (VAZG), (the Flemish Agency for Care and Health . Grant number AZG/PREV/GE/2016-01) * Indicates who the presenter was



Online (Single user only)
Institution Online (IP address validation)

Back issues may be obtained from the publisher

Consider recommending subscription to your institution's library

You can view Open Access papers without a subscription.