TRADITIONAL & MEDICAL MODELS OF PERIODONTAL CARE

开发此应用程序以测试以下假设：与传统模型相比，牙周治疗的医学模型在临床上同样有效，更有价值，并且可以在临床实践中实际实施。 为了完成这项任务，我们将进行一项前瞻性、盲法、配对、以社区为基础的队列试验。 两种分析技术将被用来比较牙周治疗的结果：临床有效性和价值。 评估临床有效性的两个主要结局变量将以临床医生为中心（依恋水平）和以患者为中心（生活质量）。 价值决定的关键结果变量是护理成本。 然后通过将结果除以护理成本来确定价值。 因此，类似的结果在降低成本增加价值。 这有助于计算护理的成本效益和成本效用，准备决策分析树，并进行敏感性分析。检验医疗护理模式有两个重要原因。 如果我们的假设是正确的，（1）这将增加牙周护理的可及性;（2）它将提供一种具有成本效益的方法来治疗与全身健康问题相关的牙周感染。 这些观点主张对医疗和传统护理模式进行直接比较。

This application was development to test the following hypothesis: A medical model of periodontal therapy, when compared to a traditional model, is as clinically effective, is more valuable, and can be realistically implemented in clinical practice. To accomplish this task we will carry out a prospective, blinded, matched, community-based, cohort trial. Two analytical techniques will be employed to compare the outcomes of periodontal therapy: clinical effectiveness and value. The two primary outcomes variables for assessing clinical effectiveness will be clinician centered (attachment level) and patient centered (quality of life). The key outcome variable for value determination is cost of care. Value is then determined by dividing the outcomes by the cost of care. Thus a similar outcome at reduced cost increased value. This facilitates calculating cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of care, preparing decision analysis trees, and carrying out sensitivity analysis. There are two significant reasons for testing a medical model of care. If our hypothesis is correct (1) this would increase access to periodontal care; and (2) it would offer a cost-effective method to treat periodontal infections that are correlated with systemic health problems. These points argue for a direct comparison of the medical and traditional model of care.