Table 4.
Scenario | Incremental Costa | Incremental Effect | ICERa |
---|---|---|---|
Base case | 11 | 0.0012 | 9167 |
Exclude “other” fractures | 0 | 0.0014 | 0 |
Intervention costs | |||
25% decrease | 0 | 0.0012 | 0 |
25% increase | 22 | 0.0012 | 18,440 |
Persistence with treatment | |||
30%, rather than 60% | 34 | 0.0006 | 56,667 |
Adherence with treatment | |||
50%, rather than 80% | 57b | 0.0004 | 142,500 |
Bisphosphonate price | |||
100% increase | 31 | 0.0012 | 25,833 |
200% increase | 51 | 0.0012 | 42,500 |
500% increase | 111 | 0.0012 | 92,500 |
Effect of bisphosphonate 35% fracture reduction | 31 | 0.0008 | 38,750 |
Discount rate (rather than 3%) | |||
0% discount rate | −30 | 0.0020 | nab |
1% discount rate | −13 | 0.0016 | nab |
5% discount rate | 26 | 0.0009 | 28,889 |
Mortality benefit (11% reduction) | 12 | 0.0021 | 5714 |
Increased mortality 1 year post-spine fracture | 11 | 0.0013 | 8462 |
QALYs quality-adjusted life years, ICER incremental cost-effectiveness ratio
aCosts are expressed in constant 2014 Canadian dollars (multiply by 0.905 to convert to 2014 US dollars [28])
bThe ICER is not applicable since the intervention dominates usual care, i.e., the intervention is less costly and more effective