Advertisement

Economic Evaluation of Community Water Fluoridation

A Community Guide Systematic Review
Published:January 06, 2016DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2015.10.014

      Context

      A recently updated Community Guide systematic review of the effectiveness of community water fluoridation once again found evidence that it reduces dental caries. Although community water fluoridation was found to save money in a 2002 Community Guide systematic review, the conclusion was based on studies conducted before 1995. Given the update to the effectiveness review, re-examination of the benefit and cost of community water fluoridation is necessary.

      Evidence acquisition

      Using methods developed for Community Guide economic reviews, 564 studies were identified within a search period from January 1995 to November 2013. Ten studies were included in the current review, with four covering community fluoridation benefits only and another six providing both cost and benefit information. Additionally, two of the six studies analyzed the cost effectiveness of community water fluoridation. All currencies were converted to 2013 dollars.

      Evidence synthesis

      The analysis was conducted in 2014. The benefit-only studies used regression analysis, showing that different measures of dental costs were always lower in communities with water fluoridation. For the six cost-benefit studies, per capita annual intervention cost ranged from $0.11 to $4.92 for communities with at least 1,000 population, and per capita annual benefit ranged from $5.49 to $93.19. Benefit–cost ratios ranged from 1.12:1 to 135:1, and these ratios were positively associated with community population size.

      Conclusions

      Recent evidence continues to indicate that the economic benefit of community water fluoridation exceeds the intervention cost. Further, the benefit–cost ratio increases with the community population size.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Chandra S.
        • Chandra S.
        • Chandra G.
        Textbook of Operative Dentistry.
        Jaypee Brothers Publishers, New Delhi, India2007https://doi.org/10.5005/jp/books/10929
        • Hartman M.
        • Martin A.B.
        • Lassman D.
        • Catlin A.
        National health spending in 2013: growth slows, remains in step with the overall economy.
        Health Aff. 2014; 34: 150-160https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2014.1107
        • Kohn W.
        • William R.M.
        • Dolores M.M.
        • Scott M.P.
        • Kerald K.S.
        Recommendations for using fluoride to prevent and control dental caries in the United States.
        MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2001; 50: 1-42
      1. Surgeon General Statement on Community Water Fluoridation. USDHHS. www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/pdf/SGstatement.pdf. Published 2001. Accessed October 2, 2015.

        • CDC
        Ten great public health achievements—United States, 1900-1999.
        MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1999; 48: 241-243
      2. Fluoridation basics. www.cdc.gov/fluoridation/basics/index.htm. Accessed October 2, 2015.

        • Kumar J.V.
        • Adekugbe O.
        • Melnik T.A.
        Geographic variation in Medicaid claims for dental procedures in New York State: role of fluoridation under contemporary conditions.
        Public Health Rep. 2010; 125: 647-654
        • Mariño R.
        • Fajardo J.
        • Morgan M.
        Cost-effectiveness models for dental caries prevention programmes among Chilean schoolchildren.
        Community Dent Health. 2012; 29: 302-308
      3. Community Preventive Services Task Force. Preventing dental caries: community water fluoridation. Task Force finding and rationale statement. www.thecommunityguide.org/oral/supportingmaterials/RRfluoridation.html. Published 2013. Accessed October 2, 2015.

        • Truman B.
        • Gooch B.F.
        • Sulemana I.
        • et al.
        Reviews of evidence on interventions to prevent dental caries, oral and pharyngeal cancers, and sports-related craniofacial injuries.
        Am J Prev Med. 2002; 23: 21-54https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00449-X
        • Carande-Kulis V.
        • Maciosek M.V.
        • Briss P.A.
        • et al.
        Methods for systematic reviews of economic evaluations for the Guide to Community Preventive Services.
        Am J Prev Med. 2000; 18: 75-91https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(99)00120-8
        • Ciketic S.
        • Hayatbakhsh M.R.
        • Doran C.M.
        Drinking water fluoridation in South East Queensland: a cost-effectiveness evaluation.
        Health Promot J Austr. 2010; 21: 51-56
        • Cobiac L.
        • Vos T.
        Cost-effectiveness of extending the coverage of water supply fluoridation for the prevention of dental caries in Australia.
        Commun Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2012; 40: 369-376https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0528.2012.00684.x
        • Griffin S.
        • Jones K.
        • Tomar S.L.
        An economic evaluation of community water fluoridation.
        J Public Health Dent. 2001; 61: 78-86https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-7325.2001.tb03370.x
        • Maupomé G.
        • Gullion C.M.
        • Peters D.
        • Little S.J.
        A comparison of dental treatment utilization and costs by HMO members living in fluoridated and nonfluoridated areas.
        J Public Health Dent. 2007; 67: 224-233https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-7325.2007.00033.x
        • O’Connell J.M.
        • Brunson D.
        • Anselmo T.
        • Sullivan P.W.
        Costs and savings associated with community water fluoridation programs in Colorado.
        Prev Chronic Dis. 2005; 2: A06
        • Tchouaket E.
        • Brousselle A.
        • Fansi A.
        • Dionne P.A.
        • Bertrand E.
        • Fortin C.
        The economic value of Quebec’s water fluoridation program.
        Z Gesundh Wiss. 2013; 21: 523-533https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-013-0578-3
        • Wright J.
        • Bates M.N.
        • Cutress T.
        • Lee M.
        The cost‐effectiveness of fluoridating water supplies in New Zealand.
        Aust N Z J Public Health. 2001; 25: 170-178https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-6405.2001.tb01841.x
        • CDC
        Water fluoridation and costs of Medicaid treatment for dental decay—Louisiana,1995-1996.
        MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1999; 48: 753-757
      4. Water Fluoridation Costs in Texas: Texas Health Steps (EPSDT-Medicaid). Report to fulfill House Concurrent Resolution 145, Texas 75th Legislature 2000. www.dshs.state.tx.us/dental/Fluoride-Cost.shtm. Accessed October 2, 2015.

        • Ringelberg M.
        • Allen S.J.
        • Brown L.J.
        Cost of fluoridation: 44 Florida communities.
        J Public Health Dent. 1992; 52: 75-80https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-7325.1992.tb02247.x
        • Campain A.
        • Marino R.
        • Wright F.
        • Harrison D.
        • Bailey D.
        • Morgan M.
        The impact of changing dental needs on cost savings from fluoridation.
        Aust Dent J. 2010; 55: 37-44https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1834-7819.2010.01173.x
        • McDonagh M.
        • Whiting P.
        • Bradley M.
        • et al.
        A systematic review of public water fluoridation.
        NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, York, United Kingdom2015 (www.nhs.uk/conditions/fluoride/documents/crdreport18.pdf. Published 2000. Accessed October 2, 2015)
        • Ko L.
        • Thiessen K.M.
        A critique of recent economic evaluations of community water fluoridation.
        Int J Occup Environ Health. 2015; 21: 91-120https://doi.org/10.1179/2049396714Y.0000000093