Table 5.
Cost-effectiveness results (after deterministic sensitivity analyses) comparing ERS with usual care
| Parameters/scenarios | How data was adjusted for in the model | Incremental cost per person | Incremental effect per person (QALY) | ICER |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Base case analysis | - | £170 | 0.008 | £20,876 |
| Parameters | ||||
| Intervention costs to participants | Costs of intervention was varied from £222 to £342 (including costs to providers and participants) | £290 | 0.008 | £35,652 |
| Less intensive ERS | Costs of intervention was varied from £222 to £110 | £58 | 0.008 | £7,085 |
| Effectiveness of ERS (based on lower limit of 95% CI) | Probability of becoming active after exposure to ERS was varied from 0.336 to 0.294 | £226 | -0.001 | Dominated* |
| Effectiveness of ERS (based upper limit of 95% CI) | Probability of becoming active after exposure to ERS was varied from 0.336 to 0.371 | £122 | 0.015 | £7,947 |
| Scenarios | ||||
| Worst cases of cost and effectiveness | Worst case cost (£342) and worst case effectiveness (0.294) | £346 | -0.001 | Dominated* |
| Best cases of cost and effectiveness | Best case cost (£110) and best case effectiveness (0.371) | £10 | 0.015 | £679 |
| Worst case cost and best case effectiveness | Best case cost (£110) and worst case effectiveness (0.294) | £242 | 0.015 | £15,734 |
| Best case cost and worst case effectiveness | Worst case cost (£342) and best case effectiveness (0.371) | £114 | -0.001 | Dominated* |
*ERS more costly and less effective than control