Author: Benjamin Alexander WhitePublisher:
ISBN:
Category : Water
Languages : en
Pages : 382
Book Description
Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Community Water Fluoridation Programs Using a State-transition Model
Author: Benjamin Alexander WhitePublisher:
ISBN:
Category : Water
Languages : en
Pages : 382
Book Description
Community Water Fluoridation
Author: Cost-benefit Analysis and Water Fluoridation
Author: D. P. DoesselPublisher:
ISBN:
Category : Cost effectiveness
Languages : en
Pages : 162
Book Description
Cost and Benefit of Fluoride in the Prevention of Dental Caries
Author: George Neville DaviesPublisher:
ISBN:
Category : Medical
Languages : en
Pages : 112
Book Description
Community Water Fluoridation
Author: Fluoridation of Drinking Water
Author: Hwei-ling GreeneyPublisher:
ISBN:
Category : Water
Languages : en
Pages : 122
Book Description
Drinking Water Quality, Economic Evaluation
Author: Community Water Fluoridation
Author: Jennifer Ann SnookPublisher:
ISBN:
Category : Water
Languages : en
Pages :
Book Description
The Politics of Water Fluoridation from a Problem Definition Perspective
Author: Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Electronic dissertations
Languages : en
Pages : 363
Book Description
Community water fluoridation has been controversial since it was first proposed more than 60 years ago. Proponents of fluoridation state that it is a safe and cost-effective method of solving a public health problem while opponents question its safety and effectiveness and whether it is a legitimate function of government. Most decisions regarding water fluoridation reside at the local level. In MA, the current law allows the local board of health to order water fluoridation. The law stipulates that within 90 days of public notice opponents can submit a petition with the signatures of 10% of the registered voters in the community, in which case a referendum would be held. Very often a referendum is held and more than half of the time and with little predictability the order is overturned. Several explanations have been offered including demographic determinism, the structure of the city government and alienation however none of these are fully explanatory. This paper examines fluoridation decisions from a problem definition perspective which purports that the way problems are defined and framed in public discourse has an impact on decision outcomes. To examine the extent that problem definition principles contribute to fluoridation decisions comparative case studies were utilized. Two communities in MA were chosen. In Worcester, MA voters said NO to a fluoridation referendum in 2001 while in New Bedford, MA voters voted YES in a 2006 referendum. The cast studies included an examination of the demographics, structure of government, issue initiators and opponents as well as a comprehensive analysis of media coverage to determine how the issue was defined and framed by spokespersons and the media. Lastly, the cases were reviewed to determine the impact that problem definition and issue framing may have had on the expansion of the conflict. This review identified common elements of framing and problem definition between the cases. Proponents in both cases defined the issue from an instrumental perspective while opponent arguments were more expressive in nature. Descriptions of the problem included many elements often used commonly by issue advocates and opponents to gain support for their views. This analysis suggests that in Worcester opponents were able to steal support from proponents who had public opinion in their favor at the start of the campaign by redefining the argument and tying their arguments to deeply held American values. In New Bedford, the opponents were not able to mobilize and were not able to change the game as they had in Worcester. This may have been due to problem definition but also the differences may have been influenced by the length and nature of the campaign and voter turnout. Future research may include a more comprehensive understanding of public opinion surrounding this issue and the development and testing of messaging campaigns that incorporate not only facts but values.
The Economic Assessment of Water Fluoridation in South Africa and Its Impact on Human Resources and Oral Health Service Delivery
Author: Jeroen KroonPublisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages :
Book Description
Water fluoridation has been confirmed by three recent reviews as one of the most cost-effective and safe primary preventive measure against dental caries. Despite this evidence no artificially fluoridated water scheme exists in South Africa. The economic impact of water fluoridation in times of a reduction in dental caries should be weighed against its benefits. A minimum package of oral care has been proposed for implementation in the public oral health services. Irrespective of the implementation of water fluoridation and/or a minimum package or oral care, it will impact on the required oral health human resources. The aim of this study was to investigate the economic viability of the implementation of water fluoridation and the delivery of the minimum package of oral care and the impact this will have on human resources planning for oral health in South Africa. Computerised simulation models were developed for this study. Per capita cost, cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of the implementation of water fluoridation was calculated for seventeen major metropolitan cities, towns and water boards in South Africa. Treatment need data was converted to a per capita cost to express the delivery of the minimum package of oral care as a monetary value. The World Health Organization/F? d? ration Dentaire Internationale and a Service Targets Method model were used to calculate the oral health human resources required to deliver the minimum package of oral care. The average per capita cost of water fluoridation for the total population is R2.08. At an anticipated 30% caries reduction achieved with water fluoridation, average cost-effectiveness is R33.16 and cost-benefit was calculated as 0.18. Cost-benefit equals or exceeds 0.8 for only three municipalities or water boards at an anticipated 10% caries reduction as a result of the implementation of water fluoridation. The average per capita cost to provide the minimum package of oral care is R245.95 without the impact of water fluoridation and R186.03 at an anticipated 30% caries reduction due to water fluoridation. Oral hygienists represent more than 50%, dental therapists between 30 to 40% and dentists less than 10% of the total oral health human resources required to deliver the minimum package of oral care. At an anticipated caries reduction of 30% due to the introduction of water fluoridation, the number of dentists required decrease by 29%, dental therapists between 27.5 and 29.8% and oral hygienists between 2.1 and 10.5%. This converts to a saving in salaries of R14,8 million per year.