Table 2.
Expected lifetime cost | Incremental cost per patient | Expected lifetime QALYs gained | Incremental QALY gained per patient | ICER ($ per QALY)* | Expected1-y mortality, absolute % | Incremental mortality reduction up to 1 y, % | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Base case analysis | |||||||
Moderate Sensitivity | 317,318 | N/A | 12.6586 | N/A | 3.5530 | ||
Current Triage | 317,494 | 176 | 12.6606 | 0.002 | 88,000 | 3.5417 | -0.0113 |
High Sensitivity | 319,470 | 1,976 | 12.6621 | 0.0015 | 1,317,333 | 3.5334 | -0.0083 |
Scenario 1: Perfect adherence for triage-positive patients (all triage- positive patients are transported to Level I or II trauma centers) | |||||||
Moderate Sensitivity | 317,967 | N/A | 12.6611 | N/A | 3.5383 | ||
Current Triage | 318,205 | 238 | 12.6637 | 0.0026 | 91,538 | 3.5237 | -0.0147 |
High Sensitivity | 320,977 | 2,772 | 12.6655 | 0.0018 | 1,540,000 | 3.5132 | -0.0105 |
Scenario 2: Perfect adherence for triage-negative patients (all triage- negative patients are transported to non-trauma hospitals) | |||||||
Moderate Sensitivity | 315,339 | N/A | 12.6542 | N/A | 3.5779 | ||
Current Triage | 315,672 | 333 | 12.6587 | 0.0045 | 74,000 | 3.5528 | -0.0251 |
High Sensitivity | 318,994 | 3,322 | 12.6619 | 0.0032 | 1,038,125 | 3.5348 | -0.0179 |
Scenario 3: Perfect adherence for triage-positive and triage-negative patients. | |||||||
Moderate Sensitivity | 315,988 | N/A | 12.6567 | N/A | 3.5632 | ||
Current Triage | 316,383 | 395 | 12.6617 | 0.0050 | 79,000 | 3.5347 | -0.0285 |
High Sensitivity | 320,502 | 4,119 | 12.6653 | 0.0036 | 1,144,167 | 3.5144 | -0.0203 |
Scenario 4: No survival benefit and no higher initial treatment cost for patients transferred from non-trauma centers to Level I or II centers. | |||||||
Moderate Sensitivity | 317,229 | N/A | 12.6568 | N/A | 3.5711 | ||
Current Triage | 317,421 | 192 | 12.6594 | 0.0026 | 73,846 | 3.5539 | -0.0172 |
High Sensitivity | 319,419 | 1,998 | 12.6613 | 0.0019 | 1,051,579 | 3.5416 | -0.0123 |
Scenario 5: No survival benefit for patients transferred from a non-trauma hospital to a Level I or II trauma center, but higher initial treatment cost, as in base case analysis. | |||||||
Moderate Sensitivity | 317,297 | N/A | 12.6575 | N/A | 3.5712 | ||
Current Triage | 317,480 | 183 | 12.6599 | 0.0024 | 76,250 | 3.554 | -0.0172 |
High Sensitivity | 319,460 | 1,980 | 12.6616 | 0.0015 | 1,320,000 | 3.5416 | -0.0124 |
Scenario 6: Lower mortality benefit among level II trauma centers compared to Level I centers (half of in- hospital and 1-y mortality reduction) | |||||||
Moderate Sensitivity | 317,232 | N/A | 12.6580 | N/A | 3.5585 | ||
Current Triage | 317,403 | 183 | 12.6598 | 0.0018 | 101,667 | 3.5474 | -0.0111 |
High Sensitivity | 319,376 | 1980 | 12.6611 | 0.0015 | 1,320,000 | 3.5395 | -0.0079 |
‘Incremental’ values are the difference compared with the next less costly scenario (ie, the row above).
ICER equals incremental cost divided by incremental QALY.
QALY, quality-adjusted life years; ICER, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.