Table 1.
Corresponding transitional probabilities of epidemiological variables and the utility values
| Input Variables | Point estimates (mean) | Standard error for uncertainty analysis | Data sources |
| Epidemiological variables | |||
| Probability of having suspected signs of CBD stones | 0.3439 | 0.0123 | 22–24 |
| Probability of having CBD stones among suspected cases | 0.2929 | 0.0455 | 1 |
| Proportion of ERCP available for patients who need it | 0.5000 | 0.0498 | Expert opinion |
| Probability of conversion from LC to OC | 0.0550 | 0.0010 | 12, 24, 26 |
| Probability of bile duct injury among patients undergoing LC | 0.0050 | 0.0003 | 12 |
| Probability of bile duct injury among patients conversed from LC to OC | 0.0030 | 0.0017 | Expert opinion |
| Probability of bile duct injury among patients undergoing OC | 0.0024 | 0.0004 | 12 |
| Probability of bile duct injury among patients undergoing open explored CBD | 0.0010 | 0.0010 | Expert opinion |
| Probability of retained CBD stones after undergoing ERCP | 0.1279 | 0.0358 | 24–26 |
| Utility variables | |||
| Utility of case with completed OC | 0.80 | 0.02 | 16 |
| Utility of case with completed LC | 0.90 | 0.02 | 16 |
| Utility of case with bile-duct injury in the first year | 0.80 | 0.02 | 16 |
| Utility of case with bile-duct injury in the subsequent twenty years | 0.89 | 0.01 | 16 |
CBD = common bile duct
ERCP = endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatograpy
LC = laparoscopic cholecystectomy
OC = open cholecystectomy