Temporomandibular disorders/myoarthropathy of the masticatory system. Costs of dental treatment and reimbursement by Swiss federal insurance agencies according to the Health Care Benefits Ordinance (KLV)

The goal of the study was to calculate the direct costs of therapy for patients with MAP. This retrospective study included 242 MAP patients treated at the Department of Prosthodontics of the University of Bern between 2003 and 2006. The following parameters were collected from the clinical charts: chief complaint, diagnosis, treatment modalities, total costs, costs of the dental technician, number of appointments, average cost per appointment, length of treatment, and services reimbursed by health insurance agencies. The average age of the patients was 40.4 ± 17.3 years (76.4% women, 23.6% men). The chief complaint was pain in 91.3% of the cases, TMJ noises (61.2%) or limitation of mandibular mobility (53.3%). Tendomyopathy (22.3%), disc displacement (22.4%), or a combination of the two (37.6%) were more often diagnosed than arthropathy alone (7.4%). Furthermore, 10.3% of the MAP patients had another primary diagnosis (tumor, trauma, etc.). Patients were treated with counseling and exercises (36.0%), physiotherapy (23.6%), or occlusal splints (32.6%). The cost of treatment reached 644 Swiss francs for four appointments spread over an average of 21 weeks. In the great majority of cases, patients can be treated with inexpensive modalities. 99.9% of the MAP cases submitted to the insurance agencies were reimbursed by them, in accordance with Article 17d1-3 of the Swiss Health Care Benefits Ordinance (KLV) and Article 25 of the Federal Health Insurance Act (KVG). The costs of treatment performed by dentists remain modest. The more time-consuming services, such as providing information, counseling and instructions, are poorly remunerated. This aspect should be re-evaluated in a future revision of the tariff schedule.

Supply sensitive services in Swiss ambulatory care: an analysis of basic health insurance records for 2003-2007

Swiss ambulatory care is characterized by independent, and primarily practice-based, physicians, receiving fee for service reimbursement. This study analyses supply sensitive services using ambulatory care claims data from mandatory health insurance. A first research question was aimed at the hypothesis that physicians with large patient lists decrease their intensity of services and bill less per patient to health insurance, and vice versa: physicians with smaller patient lists compensate for the lack of patients with additional visits and services. A second research question relates to the fact that several cantons are allowing physicians to directly dispense drugs to patients ('self-dispensation') whereas other cantons restrict such direct sales to emergencies only. This second question was based on the assumption that patterns of rescheduling patients for consultations may differ across channels of dispensing prescription drugs and therefore the hypothesis of different consultation costs in this context was investigated.

Extent and structure of health insurance expenditures for complementary and alternative medicine in Swiss primary care

BACKGROUND: The study is part of a nationwide evaluation of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in primary care in Switzerland. The goal was to evaluate the extent and structure of basic health insurance expenditures for complementary and alternative medicine in Swiss primary care. METHODS: The study was designed as a cross-sectional evaluation of Swiss primary care providers and included 262 certified CAM physicians, 151 noncertified CAM physicians and 172 conventional physicians. The study was based on data from a mailed questionnaire and on reimbursement information obtained from health insurers. It was therefore purely observational, without interference into diagnostic and therapeutic procedures applied or prescribed by physicians. Main outcome measures included average reimbursed costs per patient, structured into consultation- and medication-related costs, and referred costs. RESULTS: Total average reimbursed cost per patient did not differ between CAM physicians and conventional practitioners, but considerable differences were observed in cost structure. The proportions of reimbursed costs for consultation time were 56% for certified CAM, 41% for noncertified CAM physicians and 40% for conventional physicians; medication costs--including expenditures for prescriptions and directly dispensed drugs--respectively accounted for 35%, 18%, and 51% of costs. CONCLUSION: The results indicate no significant difference for overall treatment cost per patient between CAM and COM primary care in Switzerland. However, CAM physicians treat lower numbers of patients and a more cost-favourable patient population than conventional physicians. Differences in cost structure reflect more patient-centred and individualized treatment modalities of CAM physicians.

Complementary and alternative medicine costs - a systematic literature review

Objective: The aim of this literature review, performed within the framework of the Swiss governmental Program of Evaluation of Complementary Medicine (PEK), was to investigate costs of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Materials and Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in 11 electronic databases. All retrieved titles and reference lists were also hand-searched. Results: 38 publications were found: 23 on CAM of various definitions (medical and non-medical practitioners, over-the-counter products), 13 on homeopathy, 2 on phytotherapy. Studies investigated different kinds of costs (direct or indirect) and used different methods (prospective or retrospective questionnaires, data analyses, cost-effectiveness models). Most studies report 'out of pocket' costs, because CAM is usually not covered by health insurance. Costs per CAM-treatment / patient / month were AUD 7-66, CAD 250 and GBP 13.62 +/- 1.61. Costs per treatment were EUR 205 (range: 15-1,278), USD 414 +/- 269 and USD 1,127. In two analyses phytotherapy proved to be cost-effective. One study revealed a reduction of 1.5 days of absenteeism from work in the CAM group compared to conventionally treated patients. Another study, performed by a health insurance company reported a slight increase in direct costs for CAM. Costs for CAM covered by insurance companies amounted to approximately 0.2-0.5% of the total healthcare budget (Switzerland, 2003). Publications had several limitations, e.g. efficacy of therapies was rarely reported. As compared to conventional patients, CAM patients tend to cause lower costs. Conclusion: Results suggest lower costs for CAM than for conventional patients, but the limited methodological quality lowers the significance of the available data. Further well-designed studies and models are required.

Cumulative costs for the prosthetic reconstructions and maintenance in young adult patients with birth defects affecting the formation of teeth

OBJECTIVES: To assess retrospectively the cumulative costs for the long-term oral rehabilitation of patients with birth defects affecting the development of teeth. METHODS: Patients with birth defects who had received fixed reconstructions on teeth and/or implants > or =5 years ago were asked to participate in a comprehensive clinical, radiographic and economic evaluation. RESULTS: From the 45 patients included, 18 were cases with a cleft lip and palate, five had amelogenesis/dentinogenesis imperfecta and 22 were cases with hypodontia/oligodontia. The initial costs for the first oral rehabilitation (before the age of 20) had been covered by the Swiss Insurance for Disability. The costs for the initial rehabilitation of the 45 cases amounted to 407,584 CHF (39% for laboratory fees). Linear regression analyses for the initial treatment costs per replaced tooth revealed the formula 731 CHF+(811 CHF x units) on teeth and 3369 CHF+(1183 CHF x units) for reconstructions on implants (P<.001). Fifty-eight percent of the patients with tooth-supported reconstructions remained free from failures/complications (median observation 15.7 years). Forty-seven percent of the patients with implant-supported reconstructions remained free from failures/complications (median observation 8 years). The long-term cumulative treatment costs for implant cases, however, were not statistically significantly different compared with cases reconstructed with tooth-supported fixed reconstructions. Twenty-seven percent of the initial treatment costs were needed to cover supportive periodontal therapy as well as the treatment of technical/biological complications and failures. CONCLUSION: Insurance companies should accept to cover implant-supported reconstructions because there is no need to prepare healthy teeth, fewer tooth units need to be replaced and the cumulative long-term costs seem to be similar compared with cases restored on teeth.