TABLE 3

Association Between Preventive Dental Visits and Nonpreventive Dental Visits, Expenditures, and Overall Expenditures for Children Aged <8 Years: Naive and FE Results

VariableModel1 Preventive Visit2 Preventive Visits≥3 Preventive VisitsPreventive + Restorative Care
ββββ
Nonpreventive dental visitsNaive0.17***0.11***0.09*0.19***
Nonpreventive dental visitsFE−0.18***−0.29***−0.57***−0.42***
Nonpreventive dental expendituresNaive15.54***0.72−3.7418.36*
Nonpreventive dental expendituresFE−32.38***−48.57***−53.61***−99.72***
Medical expenditures (excluding dental)FE3.1527.13127.68−108.30
All dental expendituresFE62.28***126.31***212.57***164.57***
All medical expenditures (including dental)FE65.43153.44§340.24§56.27
  • N = 34 491 child-year observations. The sample includes observations on all Alabama CHIP enrollees aged <8 years, with 3 continuous periods of enrollment after initial enrollment, and no nonpreventive dental visits in very first enrollment period. The reference category for preventive visits is “0 preventive visits.” “Preventive + restorative” is a binary indicator for whether restorative claims were filed alongside preventive claims in any visits. Nonpreventive visits were defined as visits having at least 1 dental procedure but excluding all preventive procedures. All expenditures are in inflation-adjusted 2011 dollars. All models controls for FPL category, age, race, gender, chronic condition diagnosis, RUCA, and calendar year. However, in the FE models, time-invariant characteristics, such as gender and race, are automatically subsumed into the FE. All models were run by using Stata version 11 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX).

  • § P < .10; * P < .05; ** P < .01; *** P < .001.