Table 7.
By site - Cost-effectiveness of SHHC. ICERs (vs Status Quo) from the payer or healthcare sector perspective
| Site ID | Weight loss | BMI reduction | CRP reduction | Simple 7 increase | ASCVD QALY saved |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 284 | 759 | *93,477 | 3495 | 136,276 |
| 5 | 156 | 394 | 442 | 675 | 455,779 |
| 6 | *830 | *2502 | 482 | 1341 | 58,924 |
| 8 | 343 | 954 | 921 | 921 | 186,004 |
| 11 | 157 | 625 | 341 | 1811 | −16,991 |
| 12 | 793 | 1920 | 420 | 370 | 396,841 |
| 14 | 321 | 829 | 471 | 439 | − 9480 |
| 16 | 290 | 741 | 572 | 859 | *1,386,823 |
ICERs for QALY saved are estimated from the healthcare perspective and ICERs for other outcomes are from the payer perspective. The negative ICERs represent cost savings. The “*” implies that the effect is in the unexpected direction. For example, an ICER for weight loss with “*” implies that on average participants gained instead of lost body weight after the SHHC