Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Nov 10.
Published in final edited form as: Value Health. 2007 Sep 13;11(2):191–198. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00240.x

Table 4.

One-way sensitivity analyses

Incremental cost-effectiveness ($/LY saved)*
Incremental cost-effectiveness ($/QALY saved)*
Parameter varied SC RP SC RP
Baseline D 851 D 628
Effectiveness of MI for SC (baseline 7/110)
 10/110 19,500 14,400
 9/110 117,100 86,300
 8/110 D D
 5/110 D D
 1/110 D D
Effectiveness of MI for RP (baseline 9/21)
 12/21 D 540 D 400
 10/21 D 720 D 530
 8/21 D 1,050 D 780
 6/21 D 2,000 D 1,500
 5/21 D 3,600 D 2,600
 3/21 D D D D
Discounted LYs and QALYs saved (baseline 1.43 and 1.94, respectively)
 2 D 610 D 610
 1 D 1,200 D 1,200
 0.5 D 2,400 D 2,400
 0.1 D 12,200 D 12,200
 0.05 D 24,400 D 24,400
 0.025 D 48,700 D 48,700
Cost of the MI program (baseline $309)
 $250 D 690 D 510
 $500 D 1,400 D 1,020
 $1,000 D 2,800 D 2,100
 $2,000 D 5,600 D 4,100
Maternal medical care cost savings (baseline $0)
 $6,000 D CS D CS
 $12,000 D CS D CS
Cost savings for health care of newborn at birth and during first year of life (baseline $0)
 $1,000 D CS D CS
 $5,000 D CS D CS
*

As compared to UC, assuming UC effectiveness for SC of 8/100 and for RP of 5/28 and direct UC program costs of $4.85 per participant.

D, MI is dominated by UC (MI is more costly and less effective than UC).

For infants of women who quit or remained abstinent—estimates are per participant in the target population.

LY, life-year; MI, motivational intervention; QALY, quality-adjusted life-year; RP, relapse prevention; SC, smoking cessation; UC, usual care; CS, cost saving.