Child Dental Benefits Schedule Subsidised Existing Utilisation of Dental Care over Addressing Unmet Needs

Abstract

Priority Populations in oral health are defined as people from remote areas of Australia, low-income households, specialised medical needs, and Indigenous people. Children in these groups have irregular dental visiting patterns and a higher proportion have never accessed services. The Child Dental Benefits Schedule (CDBS) is a means-tested policy which provides financial support for eligible children to access dental services. This study aimed to explore how the introduction of CDBS affected dental visiting behaviours of Priority Populations. The outcomes of interest were the use of CDBS and its monetary benefit in the four-year period post-CDBS implementation based on a sample from the Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. Binary logit and linear models with interaction terms were used to estimate the effect of priority status and previous reported dental visiting behaviours on the probability of use and the value of subsidy claimed from CDBS. Of the children with no previous access to dental services, 33.7% were CDBS users, compared to 29.9%, 41.1%, and 44.1% who reported historically accessing services once, twice, and thrice, respectively. After adjustment for confounders, there were no significant interactions between Priority Populations and previously reported visiting behaviours; however, the pattern of lower utilisation by those with no previously reported access was evident. The state of Western Australia had a significantly lower proportion of estimated utilisation compared to all other states and territories. Children from low-income families benefitted relatively more from CDBS compared to other income groups; however, only a small proportion of the program was used to subsidise new utilisation of dental care. Children with unfavourable past dental visiting behaviours are likely to have higher unmet need, face barriers to access, and the oral health benefit is likely to be the highest. Policymakers should consider how this and similar programs can better target populations with difficulty accessing services, which will also contribute to reducing inequalities in oral health outcomes.