Table 3.
Folding-back decision tree analysis calculation
| Tooth | Utility measurement | Treatment option | EUV calculationα |
| Molar | Standard gamble | CC | [74.47 × 0.900 × 0.953]+ [(0.00 × 0.900 × 0.047)]+ [0.00 × 0.100] = 63.87 utile |
| STI | [78.60 × .951] + [0.00 × 0.049] = 74.75 utile | ||
| CDB | [76.22 × 0.976 × 0.940] + [0.00 × 0.976 × 0.940] + [(76.22 × 0.940 × 0.900) + (0.00 × 0.940 × 0.900)] + (0.00 × 0.100)] × 0.024 = 71.47 utile | ||
| RPD | = [64.80 × 0.761] + [0.00 × 0.239] = 49.31 utile | ||
| Willingness-to-pay | CC | [$1,782.05 × 0.900 × 0.953]+ [($0.00 × 0.900 × .047)]+ [$0.00 × 0.100] = 1,528.46 $CDN | |
| STI | [$1,871.78 × 0.951] + [$0.00 × 0.049] = 1,780.07 $CDN | ||
| CDB | [$1,605.13 × 0.976 × 0.940] + [$0.00 × 0.976 × 0.940] + [($1,605.13 × 0.940 × 0.900) + ($0.00 × 0.940 × 0.900)] + ($0.00 × 0.100)] × 0.024 = $1,505.20 $CDN | ||
| RPD | [$1,351.28 × 0.761] + [$0.00 × 0.239] = 1,028.32 $CDN | ||
| Incisor | Standard gamble | CC | [88.50 × 0.900 × .953]+ [(0.00 × 0.900 × .047)]+ [0.00 × 0.100] = 75.91utile |
| STI | [90.68 × .951] + [0.00 × .049] = 86.24 utile | ||
| CDB | [89.78 × 0.976 × 0.940] + [0.00 × 0.976 × 0.940] + [(89.78 × 0.940 × 0.900) + (0.00 × 0.940 × 0.900)] + (0.00 × 0.100)] × 0.024 = 84.91 utile | ||
| RPD | [91.10 × 0.761] + [0.00 × 0.239] = 69.33 utile | ||
| Willingness-to-pay | CC | [$2,552.50 × 0.900 × 0.953]+ [($0.00 × 0.900 × 0.047)]+ [$0.00 × 0.100] = 2,189.28 $CDN | |
| STI | [$2,515.00 × 0.951] + [$0.00 × 0.049] = 2,391.76 $CDN | ||
| CDB | [$2,345.00 × .976 × 0.940] + [$0.00 × .976 × 0.940] + [($2,345.00 × 0.940 × 0.900) + ($0.00 × 0.940 × 0.900)] + ($0.00 × 0.100)] × 0.024 = 2,199.10$CDN | ||
| RPD | [$2,090.00 × 0.761] + [$0.00 × 0.239] = 1,590.49 $CDN |
α-The expected-utility-value is the weighted average of the respective standard gamble and willingness-to-pay utilities for the respective dental of an abscessed 1st mandibular molar and maxillary central incisor