Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T00:39:28.975Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of the Costs and Relative Effectiveness of Alternative Strategies for the Removal of Mandibular Third Molars

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

J. F. Camilla Tulloch ,
Alexia A. Antczak-Bouckoms  and
Nancy Ung
J. F. Camilla Tulloch
Affiliation:
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Alexia A. Antczak-Bouckoms
Affiliation:
Harvard University
Nancy Ung
Affiliation:
University of Washington
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Decision analysis is used to compare the cost and disability of alternative treatment strategies for asymptomatic mandibular third molars. The analysis shows that extracting only those third molars that remain impacted and become pathologically involved is always associated with less expected cost and disability than prophylactic removal of asymptomatic wisdom teeth.

Type
Special Section: Assessing the Technology of Dentistry, Part II
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 6 , Issue 4 , October 1990 , pp. 505 - 515
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

American Dental Association, Bureau of Economic and Behavioral Research. Dental fees charged by general practitioners and selected specialists in the United States, 1985. Journal of the American Dental Association, 1986, 113, 811–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ash, M. M., Costich, E. R. & Hayward, J.R.A study of periodontal hazards of third molars. Journal of Periodontology, 1962, 33, 209–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belinfante, L. S., Marlow, C. D., Myers, W. & Rosenberg, C.Incidence of dry socket complication in third molar removal. Journal of Oral Surgery, 1973, 31, 106–08.Google ScholarPubMed
Bruce, R. A., Fredrickson, G. C. & Small, G. S.Age of patients and morbidity associated with mandibular third molar surgery. Journal of the American Dental Association, 1980, 101, 240–55.Google ScholarPubMed
Dachi, S. F. & Howell, F. V.Survey of 3,875 routine full mouth radiographs. A study of impacted teeth. Oral Surgery Oral Medicine Oral Pathology, 1961, 14, 1165–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalkey, N. C.The Delphi Method: An Experimental Study of Group Opinion. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 1969.Google Scholar
Freidman, J. W.Containing the cost of third molar extractions: A dilemma for health insurance. Public Health Reports, 1983, 98, 376–84.Google Scholar
Golberg, M. H., Nemarich, A. F & Marco, W. P.Complications after mandibular third molar surgery: A statistical analysis of 500 consecutive procedures in private practice. Journal of the American Dental Association, 1985, 111, 277–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, H. P.Prophylactic odontectomy of the developing mandibular third molar. American Journal of Orthodontics and Oral Surgery, 1938, 224, 72–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillin, G. R.Indications for removal of impacted third molars at an early age. American Journal of Orthodontics and Oral Surgery, 1947, 33, 30–37.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hinds, E. C. & Frey, K. F.Hazards of retained third molars in older persons: Report of 15 cases. Journal of the American Dental Association, 1980, 101, 246–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hollenberg, J.SMLTREE; The all purpose decision tree builder. Boston: Pratt Medical Group. 1985.Google Scholar
Laskin, D. M.Indications and contraindications for removal of impacted third molars. Dental Clinics of North America, 1969, 14, 4.Google Scholar
Lytle, J. J.Indications and contraindications for removal of the impacted tooth. Dental Clinics of North America, 1979, 23, 333–46.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Manpower survey of oral surgery. Journal of Oral Surgery (special issue A), 1977, 35.Google Scholar
National Institutes of Dental Research and Office of Medical Applications, National Institutes of Health. Removal of third molars. NIH Consensus Conference Summary, 1979, 2, 28–30.Google Scholar
Osborne, T. P., Fredrickson, G., Small, I. A. & Torgesson, T. S.A prospective study of the complications related to mandibular third molar surgery. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 1985, 43, 767–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raiffa, H.Decision analysis. Introductory lectures on choices under uncertainty. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1968.Google Scholar
Sisk, A. L., Hammer, W. B., Shelton, D. W. & Joy, E. D.Complications following removal of impacted third molars: The role of the experience of the surgeon. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 1986, 44, 855–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Torrance, G. W., Thomas, W. H. & Sackett, D. L.A utility maximization model for evaluation of health care programmes. Health Services Research, 1972, 7, 118–33.Google Scholar
Tulloch, J. F. C. & Antczak-Bouckoms, A. A.Decision analysis in the evaluation of clinical strategies for the management of mandibular third molars. Journal of Dental Education, 1987, 51, 652–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tulloch, J. F. C., Antczak, A. A. & Wilkes, J. W.The application of decision analysis to evaluate the need for extraction of asymptomatic third molars. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 1987, 45, 855–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ung, , N. A cost-effectiveness analysis for the removal of asyptomatic impacted third molars. Thesis for Doctor of Dental Medicine. Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Harvard University, Boston, MA, 1987.Google Scholar
Weinstein, M. C. & Feinberg, H. V.Clinical decision analysis. Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Saunders, 1980.Google Scholar