What do systematic reviews say?

Extraction of the primary (baby) canine (single primary tooth extraction) vs No extraction (non-intervention control)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for promoting the eruption of palatally displaced permanent canine teeth, without the need for surgical… 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The study did not report cost-effectiveness.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Zygomatic implants without bone grafts (as a complete alternative to any bone augmentation procedure) vs Conventional dental implants in augmented maxillae

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for replacing missing teeth: dental implants in zygomatic bone for the rehabilitation of the severely… 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes

  At least 1 year in function
  Results (Effects of interventions): we could not identify any eligible randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
  0 studies
  No studies found

Hyperbaric oxygen vs No HBO therapy

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for replacing missing teeth: hyperbaric oxygen therapy for irradiated patients who require dental implants 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Cost effectiveness data were not presented but it was possible to extrapolate this.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Preprosthetic surgery for a conventional denture (PPS) vs Implant retained overdenture (dental implants) (IRO)

• Interventions for replacing missing teeth: preprosthetic surgery versus dental implants 2002 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Cost-effectiveness (outcome 1.9): The cost-effectiveness data could not be extracted from the report as it was combined with a separate trial.
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Double primary (canine and first molar) tooth extraction vs Single primary (canine) tooth extraction

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for promoting the eruption of palatally displaced permanent canine teeth, without the need for surgical… 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes
  The studies did not report cost-effectiveness.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) vs Stepwise carious tissue removal (SW)

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Permanent and primary dentition
  Cost-effectiveness reported narratively: SE found more cost-effective than SW in permanent (Labib 2019) and primary teeth (Elhennawy 2021); not GRADE-rated.
  2 studies
  GRADE not reported

Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) vs Hall Technique (sealing with a preformed metal crown)

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Primary dentition
  Cost-effectiveness reported narratively: HT found more cost-effective than CR in primary teeth (Innes 2011; Santamaria 2018); not GRADE-rated.
  2 studies
  GRADE not reported

Hall technique vs Non-restorative cavity control (NRCC)

• Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes

  Primary dentition
  Cost-effectiveness reported narratively: HT found more cost-effective than NRCC in primary teeth (Santamaria 2018); not GRADE-rated.
  1 study
  GRADE not reported

Fee‐for‐service (FFS) vs no intervention or control intervention (control)

• The effect of different methods of remuneration on the behaviour of primary care dentists 2013 · Cochrane All outcomes

  18 months
  ICER 0.10
  1 study · 68 participants
  Very low