TODENTJ-25-03-2019_TODENTJ-11-498 1553507090 Bentham Open doi@benthamopen.net Bentham Open The Open Dentistry Journal TODENTJ 1874-2106 09 14 2017 11 1 Pedram Sendi Nadine Bertschinger Christina Brand Carlo P. Marinello Heiner C. Bucher Michael M. Bornstein Purpose: Two interforaminal dental implants in is a common treatment option for denture retention in edentulous patients. Economic methods to assess the patient’s quality of life include the willingness to pay (WTP) for implant treatment and willingness to accept (WTA) to forgo implant treatment. The purpose of this study was to assess the monetary value of implant retained complete dentures using WTP and WTA. Methods: We included a convenience sample of 16 patients from a previously published cohort study on the survival of immediately loaded implants in edentulous patients to assess WTP and WTA for this treatment option. Results: The average maximum WTP for implant treatment was 4606 (95% CI: 2991-6222) Swiss Francs. Out of the 16 patients, only 5 were willing to trade their implants for money, with a mean WTA of CHF 33'500 (range: 3000-100'000). All patients would agree to undergo the implant surgery procedure again. Conclusion: The results of the present study show that most patients are not willing to trade the increase in quality of life after implant surgery against money, suggesting that WTA exceeds by large WTP for the same health condition. 09 14 2017 498 502 TODENTJ-11-498 1 10.2174/crossmark_policy opendentistryjournal.com benthamopen.com true Peer Reviewed Single blind Checked with iThenticate 2017-04-08 2017-06-16 2017-08-15 2017-09-14 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode 10.2174/1874210601711010498 1553507090 https://opendentistryjournal.com/VOLUME/11/PAGE/498/ https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V11/TODENTJ-11-498/TODENTJ-11-498.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V11/TODENTJ-11-498/TODENTJ-11-498.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V11/TODENTJ-11-498/TODENTJ-11-498.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V11/TODENTJ-11-498/TODENTJ-11-498.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V11/TODENTJ-11-498/TODENTJ-11-498.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V11/TODENTJ-11-498/TODENTJ-11-498.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V11/TODENTJ-11-498/TODENTJ-11-498.pdf https://opendentistryjournal.com/contents/volumes/V11/TODENTJ-11-498/TODENTJ-11-498.xml Schweiz. Monatsschr. Zahnmed. Büttel A.E. 122 392 2012 Büttel AE, Gratwohl DA, Sendi P, Marinello CP. Immediate loading of two unsplinted mandibular implants in edentulous patients with an implant-retained overdenture: An observational study over two years. Schweiz Monatsschr Zahnmed 2012; 122 (5) : 392-7. Gerodontology Feine J.S. 19 3 2002 10.1111/j.1741-2358.2002.00003.x Feine JS, Carlsson GE, Awad MA, et al. The McGill consensus statement on overdentures. Mandibular two-implant overdentures as first choice standard of care for edentulous patients. Gerodontology 2002; 19 (1) : 3-4. J. Oral Rehabil. Rashid F. 38 176 2011 10.1111/j.1365-2842.2010.02143.x Rashid F, Awad MA, Thomason JM, et al. The effectiveness of 2-implant overdentures- a pragmatic international multicentre study. J Oral Rehabil 2011; 38 (3) : 176-84. J. Dent. Res. Zitzmann N.U. 85 717 2006 10.1177/154405910608500806 Zitzmann NU, Marinello CP, Sendi P. A cost-effectiveness analysis of implant overdentures. J Dent Res 2006; 85 (8) : 717-21. Int. J. Prosthodont. Zitzmann N.U. 18 20 2005 Zitzmann NU, Sendi P, Marinello CP. An economic evaluation of implant treatment in edentulous patients-preliminary results. Int J Prosthodont 2005; 18 (1) : 20-7. Int. J. Prosthodont. Awad M.A. 16 390 2003 Awad MA, Lund JP, Shapiro SH, et al. Oral health status and treatment satisfaction with mandibular implant overdentures and conventional dentures: A randomized clinical trial in a senior population. Int J Prosthodont 2003; 16 (4) : 390-6. J. Dent. Tan S.H. 64 1 2017 10.1016/j.jdent.2017.06.010 Tan SH, Vernazza CR, Nair R. Critical review of willingness to pay for clinical oral health interventions. J Dent 2017; 64 : 1-12. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. Heydecke G. 31 161 2003 10.1034/j.1600-0528.2003.00029.x Heydecke G, Locker D, Awad MA, Lund JP, Feine JS. Oral and general health-related quality of life with conventional and implant dentures. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2003; 31 (3) : 161-8. Int. J. Prosthodont. Zhang Q. 30 321 2017 10.11607/ijp.5023 Zhang Q, Jin X, Yu M, et al. Economic evaluation of implant-supported overdentures in edentulous patients: A systematic review. Int J Prosthodont 2017; 30 (4) : 321-6. J. Dent. Res. Birch S. 81 446 2002 10.1177/154405910208100702 Birch S, Ismail AI. Patient preferences and the measurement of utilities in the evaluation of dental technologies. J Dent Res 2002; 81 (7) : 446-50. J. Public Health Dent. Matthews D.C. 59 44 1999 10.1111/j.1752-7325.1999.tb03234.x Matthews DC, Birch S, Gafni A, DiCenso A. Willingness to pay for periodontal therapy: Development and testing of an instrument. J Public Health Dent 1999; 59 (1) : 44-51. Community Dent. Health Matthews D.C. 16 5 1999 Matthews DC, Gafni A, Birch S. Preference based measurements in dentistry: A review of the literature and recommendations for research. Community Dent Health 1999; 16 (1) : 5-11. Health Econ. Diener A. 7 313 1998 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199806)7:4<313::AID-HEC350>3.0.CO;2-B Diener A, O’Brien B, Gafni A. Health care contingent valuation studies: A review and classification of the literature. Health Econ 1998; 7 (4) : 313-26. Gerodontology Esfandiari S. 26 3 2009 10.1111/j.1741-2358.2008.00237.x Esfandiari S, Lund JP, Penrod JR, Savard A, Thomason JM, Feine JS. Implant overdentures for edentulous elders: Study of patient preference. Gerodontology 2009; 26 (1) : 3-10. Health Econ. O’Brien B.J. 11 175 2002 10.1002/hec.655 O’Brien BJ, Gertsen K, Willan AR, Faulkner LA. Is there a kink in consumers’ threshold value for cost-effectiveness in health care? Health Econ 2002; 11 (2) : 175-80. Sendi P. Decision rules and uncertainty in the economic evaluation of health care technologies. Erasmus University Rotterdam 2005. Retrieved from: https://hdl.handle.net/1765/31868