Differences in Cumulative Long-Term Care Costs by Dental Visit Pattern Among Japanese Older Adults: The JAGES Cohort Study.

Sakura Kiuchi, Kenji Takeuchi, Masashige Saito, Taro Kusama, Noriko Nakazawa, Kinya Fujita, Katsunori Kondo, Jun Aida, Ken Osaka
{"title":"Differences in Cumulative Long-Term Care Costs by Dental Visit Pattern Among Japanese Older Adults: The JAGES Cohort Study.","authors":"Sakura Kiuchi, Kenji Takeuchi, Masashige Saito, Taro Kusama, Noriko Nakazawa, Kinya Fujita, Katsunori Kondo, Jun Aida, Ken Osaka","doi":"10.1093/gerona/glae194","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Long-term care (LTC) costs create burdens on aging societies. Maintaining oral health through dental visits may result in shorter LTC periods, thereby decreasing LTC costs; however, this remains unverified. We examined whether dental visits in the past 6 months were associated with cumulative LTC insurance (LTCI) costs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cohort study of the Japan Gerontological Evaluation Study targeted independent adults aged≥65 years in 2010 over an 8-year follow-up. We used data from a self-reported questionnaire and LTCI records from the municipalities. The outcome was cumulative LTCI costs, and exposure was dental visits within 6 months for prevention, treatment, and prevention or treatment. A 2-part model was used to estimate the differences in the predicted cumulative LTCI costs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each dental visit.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age of the 8 429 participants was 73.7 years (standard deviation [SD] = 6.0), and 46.1% were men. During the follow-up period, 17.6% started using LTCI services. The mean cumulative LTCI cost was USD 4 877.0 (SD = 19 082.1). The predicted cumulative LTCI costs were lower among those had dental visits than among those who did not. The differences in predicted cumulative LTCI cost were -USD 1 089.9 (95% CI = -1 888.5 to -291.2) for dental preventive visits, -USD 806.7 (95% CI = -1 647.4 to 34.0) for treatment visits, and -USD 980.6 (95% CI = -1 835.7 to -125.5) for preventive or treatment visits.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Dental visits, particularly preventive visits, were associated with lower cumulative LTCI costs. Maintaining oral health through dental visits may effectively reduce LTCI costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":94243,"journal":{"name":"The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11369224/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glae194","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Long-term care (LTC) costs create burdens on aging societies. Maintaining oral health through dental visits may result in shorter LTC periods, thereby decreasing LTC costs; however, this remains unverified. We examined whether dental visits in the past 6 months were associated with cumulative LTC insurance (LTCI) costs.

Methods: This cohort study of the Japan Gerontological Evaluation Study targeted independent adults aged≥65 years in 2010 over an 8-year follow-up. We used data from a self-reported questionnaire and LTCI records from the municipalities. The outcome was cumulative LTCI costs, and exposure was dental visits within 6 months for prevention, treatment, and prevention or treatment. A 2-part model was used to estimate the differences in the predicted cumulative LTCI costs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each dental visit.

Results: The mean age of the 8 429 participants was 73.7 years (standard deviation [SD] = 6.0), and 46.1% were men. During the follow-up period, 17.6% started using LTCI services. The mean cumulative LTCI cost was USD 4 877.0 (SD = 19 082.1). The predicted cumulative LTCI costs were lower among those had dental visits than among those who did not. The differences in predicted cumulative LTCI cost were -USD 1 089.9 (95% CI = -1 888.5 to -291.2) for dental preventive visits, -USD 806.7 (95% CI = -1 647.4 to 34.0) for treatment visits, and -USD 980.6 (95% CI = -1 835.7 to -125.5) for preventive or treatment visits.

Conclusions: Dental visits, particularly preventive visits, were associated with lower cumulative LTCI costs. Maintaining oral health through dental visits may effectively reduce LTCI costs.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
日本老年人牙科就诊模式的累积长期护理成本差异:JAGES 队列研究。
背景:长期护理(LTC)费用给老龄化社会造成了负担。通过看牙来保持口腔健康可能会缩短长期护理时间,从而降低长期护理成本;然而,这一点仍未得到证实。我们研究了过去 6 个月的牙科就诊是否与累积的 LTC 保险(LTCI)费用有关:这项日本老年学评估研究的队列研究以 2010 年年龄≥65 岁的独立成年人为对象,随访八年。我们使用的数据来自自我报告问卷和各市的 LTCI 记录。结果是累计的 LTCI 费用,暴露是 6 个月内为预防、治疗和预防或治疗而进行的牙科就诊。我们使用了一个由两部分组成的模型来估算每次牙科就诊的累计 LTCI 费用预测差异和 95% 置信区间 (CI):8429 名参与者的平均年龄为 73.7 岁(标准差 [SD] =6.0),46.1% 为男性。在随访期间,17.6%的人开始使用 LTCI 服务。平均累计长期护理保险费用为 4877.0 美元(标准差=19082.1)。接受过牙科检查者的预测累计 LTCI 费用低于未接受过牙科检查者。牙科预防性就诊的预测累积 LTCI 成本差异为-1089.9 美元(95%CI = -1,888.5 --291.2),治疗性就诊的预测累积 LTCI 成本差异为-806.7 美元(95%CI = -1,647.4 --34.0),预防性或治疗性就诊的预测累积 LTCI 成本差异为-980.6 美元(95%CI = -1,835.7 --125.5):结论:牙科就诊,尤其是预防性就诊,与较低的累计 LTCI 成本相关。通过牙科就诊保持口腔健康可有效降低长期护理保险费用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Disentangling Anemia in Frailty: Exploring the Role of Inflammation. Inflammatory Indices and Their Associations with Postoperative Delirium. Metabolic signature of insulin resistance and risk of Alzheimer's disease. Higher-order disease interactions in multimorbidity measurement: marginal benefit over additive disease summation. Sex Differences in the Association Between 24-hour Rest-Activity Rhythms and Frailty Among U.S. Older Adults: Findings from NHANES 2011-2014.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1