ArticleBMC oral health2022
Economic analysis of the different endodontic instrumentation techniques used in the Unified Health System.
Article in BMC oral health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical and radiographic outcomes of pulpectomy in primary teeth using two rotary file systems compared with manual files: a cost-effectiveness analysis.BMC oral health · 2025Trial
- Prevalence of Apical Periodontitis, Alveolar Bone Loss, and Root-Filled Teeth Among Olympic Athletes.Australian endodontic journal : the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc · 2026Article
- Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis in dental medicine: a systematic review with a focus on affordability and risk-aversion.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2025Review
- Cost-efficiency analysis of atraumatic restorative treatment with and without chemical-mechanical caries removal agents based on pain and time for selective removal of carious tissue: a public health perspective.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Insights and networks: methodological assessment and scientometric analysis of economic evaluations in dentistry.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Non-surgical endodontic retreatments in Brazil's public dental services: a 15-year nationwide register-based study.Brazilian dental journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo assess the financial impact of incorporating a new (reciprocal) technology into endodontic treatments in the public health system (SUS).
methodsThis was a economic evaluation study (comparing the 3 different endodontic instrumentation techniques-manual, rotary and reciprocating), allocative efficiency analysis to optimize existing resources in the SUS, and financial contribution impact analysis of incorporation of a new technology. Thirty-one (31) 12 years-old volunteers were evaluated.
resultsThe incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated at R$1.34/min, - R$0.60/min and BRL 0.10/min for the single-rooted, bi-rooted and tri-rooted teeth, respectively, when the rotary technique was compared with the manual type. In turn, the ICER was R$ 21.04/min, - R$ 0.73/min and - R$ 2.81/min for the 3 types of teeth, respectively, when the reciprocating technique was compared with the manual type. The incremental financial impact of replacing manual endodontic with rotary endodontic treatments would be - R$ 2060963.66 in the case of single-rooted teeth, but the number of treatments would also be reduced (- 19,379). In the case of two-rooted teeth, the incremental financial impact would be BRL 34921540.62 with the possibility of performing an additional 204,110 treatments. In turn, BRL 11523561.50 represented the incremental financial impact for teeth with 3 or more roots and with an increase of 72,545 procedures. When we analyzed the incremental financial impact of replacing manual endodontic with reciprocating endodontic treatments, it would be - R$ 730227.80 in the case of single-rooted teeth, allowing for an additional 2538 treatments. In turn, R$ 21674853.00 represented the incremental financial impact for bi-radicular teeth, with an increase of 121,700 procedures. In the case of two-rooted teeth, the incremental financial impact would be BRL 13591742.90 with the possibility of performing an additional 40,670 treatments.
conclusionsThe reciprocating technique could improve access to endodontic treatment in the SUS as it allowed a simultaneous reduction in clinical time and associated costs. However, the higher number of endodontic treatments performed would have a financial impact.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.