Is it cost-beneficial to society? Measuring the economic worth of dental residency training

• Published in: Evaluation and program planning 2018-06, Vol.68, p.117-123
• Main Authors: Da’ar, Omar B., Alshaya, Abdulaziz
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Benefit-Cost Analysis; Cost analysis; Cost benefit analysis; Cost Effectiveness; Dental program; Dental schools; Dentistry; Earnings; Family physicians; Health economics; Medical residencies; Payments; Programming; Public sector; Residency training; Sampling; Saudi Arabia; Sensitivity analysis; Society; Trainees; Training
• ISSN: 0149-7189; 1873-7870
• DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.02.012

•While advanced dental trainings may be cost-beneficial, there is limited evidence to establish their true relative economic value to society.•Economic evaluation of health programs contributes to both inadequate literature and methodological limitations in the country and region.•Economic evaluation of residency training may help inform society of the justification for continued programming. This study estimated whether continued programming of a highly specialized four-year dentistry residency training in Saudi Arabia was cost-beneficial. We utilized a purposive sampling to administer a survey to trainees in major cities. Additionally, we used publically available market information about general practitioners. We employed Benefit-Cost Analysis accounting approach as a conceptual framework. Using general practitioners as the base category, we grouped overall social analytical perspectives into resident trainees and rest of society. The residency program was cost-beneficial to trainees, realizing an estimated return of SR 4.07 per SR 1 invested. The overall societal return was SR 0.98 per SR 1 invested, slightly shy of a bang for the buck, in part because the public sector largely runs the training. Benefits included increased earnings and enhanced restorative dentistry skills accruing to trainees; increased charitable contributions and programming-related payments accruing to programs and the public; and practice-related payments accruing to governmental, professional, and insurance agencies. Rest of society, notably government underwrote much of the cost of programming. A sensitivity analysis revealed the results were robust to uncertainties in the data and estimation. Our findings offer evidence to evaluate whether continued residency training is cost-beneficial to trainees and potentially to overall society.