The prevalence of periodontal disease in Mexican American vs European American elderly in three distinct socio-economic communities in San Antonio, Texas

Purpose of the Study: This study evaluated the prevalence of periodontal disease between Mexican American elderly and European American elderly residing in three socio-economically distinct neighborhoods in San Antonio, Texas. ^ Study Group: Subjects for the original protocol were participants of the Oral Health: San Antonio Longitudinal Study of Aging (OH: SALSA), which began with National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding in 1993 (M.J. Saunders, PI). The cohort in the study was the individuals who had been enrolled in Phases I and III of the San Antonio Heart Study (SAHS). This SAHS/SALSA sample is a community-based probability sample of Mexican American and European American residents from three socio-economically distinct San Antonio neighborhoods: low-income barrio, middle-income transitional, and upper-income suburban. The OH: SALSA cohort was established between July 1993 and May 1998 by sampling two subsets of the San Antonio Heart Study (SAHS) cohort. These subsets included the San Antonio Longitudinal Study of Aging (SALSA) cohort, comprised of the oldest members of the SAHS (age 65+ yrs. old), and a younger set of controls (age 35-64 yrs. old) sampled from the remainder of the SAHS cohort. ^ Methods: The study used simple descriptive statistics to describe the sociodemographic characteristics and periodontal disease indicators of the OH: SALSA participants. Means and standard deviations were used to summarize continuous measures. Proportions were used to summarize categorical measures. Simple m x n chi square statistics was used to compare ethnic differences. A multivariable ordered logit regression was used to estimate the prevalence of periodontal disease and test ethnic group and neighborhood differences in the prevalence of periodontal disease. A multivariable model adjustment for socio-economic status (income and education), gender, and age (treated as confounders) was applied. ^ Summary: In the unadjusted and adjusted model, Mexican American elderly demonstrated the greatest prevalence for periodontitis, p < 0.05. Mexican American elderly in barrio neighborhoods demonstrated the greatest prevalence for severe periodontitis, with unadjusted prevalence rates of 31.7%, 22.3%, and 22.4% for Mexican American elderly barrio, transitional, and suburban neighborhoods, respectively. Also, Mexican American elderly had adjusted prevalence rates of 29.4%, 23.7%, and 20.4% for barrio, transitional, and suburban neighborhoods, respectively. ^ Conclusion: This study indicates that the prevalence of periodontal disease is an important oral health issue among the Mexican American elderly. The results suggest that the socioeconomic status of the residential neighborhood increased the risk for severe periodontal disease among the Mexican American elderly when compared to European American elderly. A viable approach to recognizing oral health disparities in our growing population of Mexican American elderly is imperative for the provision of special care programs that will help increase the quality of care in this minority population.^

A review of economic analysis in the vaccination program; decision making and governance: Adivisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) develops written recommendations for the routine administration of vaccines to children and adults in the U.S. civilian population. The ACIP is the only entity in the federal government that makes such recommendations. ACIP elaborates on selection of its members and rules out concerns regarding its integrity, but fails to provide information about the importance of economic analysis in vaccine selection. ACIP recommendations can have large health and economic consequences. Emphasis on economic evaluation in health is a likely response to severe pressures of the federal and state health budget. This study describes the economic aspects considered by the ACIP while sanctioning a vaccine, and reviews the economic evaluations (our economic data) provided for vaccine deliberations. A five year study period from 2004 to 2009 is adopted. Publicly available data from ACIP web database is used. Drummond et al. (2005) checklist serves as a guide to assess the quality of economic evaluations presented. Drummond et al.'s checklist is a comprehensive hence it is unrealistic to expect every ACIP deliberation to meet all of their criteria. For practical purposes we have selected seven criteria that we judge to be significant criteria provided by Drummond et al. Twenty-four data points were obtained in a five year period. Our results show that out of the total twenty-four data point‘s (economic evaluations) only five data points received a score of six; that is six items on the list of seven were met. None of the data points received a perfect score of seven. Seven of the twenty-four data points received a score of five. A minimum of a two score was received by only one of the economic analyses. The type of economic evaluation along with the model criteria and ICER/QALY criteria met at 0.875 (87.5%). These three criteria were met at the highest rate among the seven criteria studied. Our study findings demonstrate that the perspective criteria met at 0.583 (58.3%) followed by source and sensitivity analysis criteria both tied at 0.541 (54.1%). The discount factor was met at 0.250 (25.0%).^ Economic analysis is not a novel concept to the ACIP. It has been practiced and presented at these meetings on a regular basis for more than five years. ACIP‘s stated goal is to utilize good quality epidemiologic, clinical and economic analyses to help policy makers choose among alternatives presented and thus achieve a better informed decision. As seen in our study the economic analyses over the years are inconsistent. The large variability coupled with lack of a standardized format may compromise the utility of the economic information for decision-making. While making recommendations, the ACIP takes into account all available information about a vaccine. Thus it is vital that standardized high quality economic information is provided at the ACIP meetings. Our study may provide a call for the ACIP to further investigate deficiencies within the system and thereby to improve economic evaluation data presented. ^