Cost

Cost

68. Cost-effective and cost-saving?

69. Practical?

68. Is water fluoridation a cost-effective and cost-saving method of preventing tooth decay?

Answer.

Yes. When compared to the cost of other prevention programs, water fluoridation is the most cost-effective means of preventing tooth decay for both children and adults in the United States. A number of studies over the past 15 years have attempted to place a specific dollar value on the benefit of fluoridation. These studies, conducted in different years (and therefore using different dollar values), encompassing different communities/populations and different methodologies have two conclusions in common: 1) for systems that serve more than 1,000 people, the economic benefit of fluoridation exceeds the cost and 2) the benefit-cost ratios increased as the size of the populations increase largely due to economies of scale.

Fact.

The cost of community water fluoridation varies for each community depending on the following factors.1

1. Size of the community (population and water usage);

2. Number of fluoride injection points where fluoride additives will be added to the water system;

3. Amount and type of equipment used to add and monitor fluoride additives;

4. Amount and type of fluoride additive needed to reach the target fluoride level of 0.7 mg/L; its price, cost of transportation and storage; and

5. Expertise and preferences of personnel at the water plant.

In 2016, a study2 led by researchers from the Colorado School of Public Health created a model of fluoridation program costs, savings, net savings and return on investment for the 2013 U.S. population with access to optimally fluoridated water systems that served 1,000 or more people. The researchers found that savings associated with individuals avoiding tooth decay in 2013 as a result of fluoridation were estimated at $6.8 billion, or $32.19 per person, for the more than 211 million people who had access to fluoridated water through community water systems serving more than 1,000 people that year. Based on the estimated cost of the systems to fluoridate ($324 million), the net savings from fluoridation was estimated at $6.5 billion and the estimated return on investment (ROI) averaged 20 to 1 across water systems of all sizes (from 1,000 to over 100,000 people with a ROI range of 15.5 to 26.2). However, it was noted that the cost per person to fluoridate can vary significantly among different sizes of communities based on a number of the factors outlined in the previous paragraph. Because of those variables, the researchers urged communities to inform their policy decisions by identifying their specific water system’s annual cost and comparing that cost to the annual estimated per person savings ($32.19) in averted treatment costs. The researchers noted that in 2013, while 211 million people had access to fluoridated water, more than 78 million people had access to a public water system that served 1,000 or more people that was not fluoridated. The study findings suggest that if those water systems had been fluoridated, an additional $2.5 billion could have been saved as a result of reductions in tooth decay.2

The economic benefits of fluoridation were also reconfirmed in a systematic review3 conducted in 2013 by the Community Preventive Services Task Force which sought to update their prior review conducted in 20024 which also found that fluoridation saved money. The 2013 review concluded that recent evidence continues to indicate the economic benefit of fluoridation programs exceeds their cost. The review also noted that benefit-cost ratio increases with the population of the community.

Because of the decay reducing effects of fluoride, the need for restorative dental care is typically lower in fluoridated communities. Therefore, an individual residing in a fluoridated community will typically pay for fewer dental restorative services (such as fillings) during a lifetime. A study5 published in 2005, estimated the cost and treatment savings resulting from community water fluoridation programs in Colorado. The study also estimated the added savings if communities without water fluoridation initiated a fluoridation program. The study estimated a community fluoridation program generated treatment savings through prevented tooth decay of $61 for every $1 spent to fluoridate the community’s water. On a state level, results indicated an annual savings of nearly $150 million associated with the water fluoridation programs and projected a nearly $50 million annual savings if the remaining 52 nonfluoridated water systems in Colorado were to implement water fluoridation programs.5

There are various types of dental restorations (fillings) commonly used for the initial treatment of tooth decay (cavities) including amalgam (silver) and composite resins (tooth-colored). In the 2016 study noted earlier2, the most commonly used treatment was a two-surface composite resin restoration in posterior (back) permanent teeth. Considering the fact that in the United States the fee6 for a two-surface composite resin restoration in a permanent tooth placed by a general dentist typically ranges from $165-$305*, fluoridation clearly demonstrates significant cost savings. An individual can enjoy a lifetime of fluoridated water for less than the cost of one dental filling.

An individual can enjoy a lifetime of fluoridated water for less than the cost of one dental filling.

*The Survey data should not be interpreted as constituting a fee schedule in any way, and should not be used for that purpose. Dentists must establish their own fees based on their individual practice and market considerations. The American Dental Association discourages dentists from engaging in any unlawful concerted activity regarding fees or otherwise.

When it comes to the cost of treating dental disease, everyone pays. Not just those who need treatment, but the entire community — through higher health insurance premiums and higher taxes. Cutting dental care costs by reducing tooth decay is something a community can do to improve oral health and save money for everyone. With the escalating cost of health care, fluoridation remains a community public health measure that saves money and so benefits all members of the community.

When it comes to the cost of treating dental disease, everyone pays. Not just those who need treatment, but the entire community — through higher health insurance premiums and higher taxes. Cutting dental care costs by reducing tooth decay is something a community can do to improve oral health and save money for everyone.

The economic importance of fluoridation is underscored by the fact that the cost of treating dental disease frequently is paid not only by the affected individual, but also by the general public through services provided by health departments, community health clinics, health insurance premiums, the military and other publicly supported medical programs.7 For example, results from a New York State study published in 20108 that compared the number of Medicaid claims in 2006 for cavity-related procedures in fluoridated and nonfluoridated counties showed a 33.4% higher level of claims for fillings, root canals and extractions in nonfluoridated counties as compared to such claims in fluoridated counties.8

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Feb 19, 2020 | Posted by in General Dentistry | Comments Off on Cost
Premium Wordpress Themes by UFO Themes