Geographic patterns of dental service use in the Child Dental Benefits Schedule: 6 years of claims in the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children

Abstract

AbstractIssue AddressedThis article explores the geographic patterns of claims within the Australian Government's Child Dental Benefits Schedule (CDBS).BackgroundThe CDBS is a means‐tested schedule implemented in 2014 to improve access to dental services for children. Under the schedule, eligible children receive funding to subsidise dental services.MethodsThis study used data from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children and linked data from the Medicare universal healthcare system, to examine dental service use amongst a subset of children aged 10 and 14 years. Dental service items were classified using Two‐step Cluster Analysis, and appointments were analysed using multinomial logistic regression. Geographic characteristics were included as predictor variables.ResultsThe study found that the majority of dental appointments were non‐operative (70.7%, n = 5808), with diagnostic, radiographic, and preventive items being the most common. There were slightly higher proportions of operative appointments (fillings and extractions) compared with non‐operative appointments in remote and very remote areas, low socio‐economic areas, and Queensland and Northern Territory. Cluster analysis identified eight groups of non‐operative appointments and four groups of operative appointments. New South Wales had a higher proportion of ‘prophylactic IV’ appointments than any other State and Territory, which included debridement and topical fluoride services.ConclusionCluster analysis identified distinct groups of non‐operative and operative appointments, each with unique characteristics. The distribution of appointments varied by State/Territory and region.So WhatFurther research and interventions are needed to ensure equitable access to services and a shift to preventive care for disadvantaged populations of Australian children. Exploring alternative funding models that support clinically relevant claims, rather than maximising financial benefits such as time‐based renumeration models should be explored.