Table 2.
Results of the main and sensitivity analysis based on 5000 bootstrap simulations. Costs are expressed in 2013 Euros.
| Analysis and outcome | Incremental costs, € (95% CI) | Incremental effects, points (95% CI) | Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, €/points (95% CI)a | Distribution over the cost-effectiveness plane, % | ||||
| North-east quadrantb | South-east quadrantc | South-west quadrantd | North-west quadrante | |||||
| Main analysis | ||||||||
|
|
Perceived stress (range 0-40) | −386 (−1794 to 1006) | 6.27 (4.9 to 7.7)f | Dominant (dominant to 171) | 30 | 70 | —g | — |
|
|
Symptom-free status (0/1) | −386 (−1794 to 1006) | 0.362 (0.25 to 0.47)f | Dominant (dominant to 3360) | 30 | 70 | — | — |
|
|
QALYsh (range: 0-1) | −386 (−1794 to 1006) | 0.0074 (−0015 to 0.016) | Dominanti | 26 | 69 | 2 | 3 |
| Sensitivity analysis 1j | ||||||||
|
|
Perceived stress (range 0-40) | −616 (−1731 to 485) | 6.27 (4.9 to 7.7)f | Dominant (dominant to 81) | 13 | 87 | — | — |
|
|
Symptom-free status ( 0/1) | −616 (−1731 to 485) | 0.362 (0.25 to 0.47)f | Dominant (dominant to 1415) | 13 | 87 | — | — |
|
|
QALYs (range: 0-1) | −616 (−1731 to 485) | 0.0074 (−0015 to 0.016) | Dominanti | 12 | 83 | 2 | 3 |
| Sensitivity analysis 2k , €+100 added to intervention costs | ||||||||
|
|
Perceived stress (range 0-40) | −286 (−1694 to 1106) | 6.27 (4.9 to 7.7)f | Dominant (dominant to 187) | 34 | 66 | — | — |
|
|
Symptom-free status (0/1) | −286 (−1694 to 1106) | 0.362 (0.25 to 0.47)f | Dominant (dominant to 3419) | 34 | 66 | — | — |
|
|
QALYs (range: 0-1) | −286 (−1694 to 1106) | 0.0075 (−0015 to 0.016) | Dominanti | 31 | 64 | 2 | 3 |
| Sensitivity analysis 2k , €-100 added to intervention costs | ||||||||
|
|
Perceived stress (range 0-40) | −486 (−1894 to 906) | 6.27 (4.9 to 7.7)f | Dominant (dominant to 155) | 24 | 76 | — | — |
|
|
Symptom-free status (0/1) | −486 (−1894 to 906) | 0.362 (0.25 to 0.47)f | Dominant (dominant to 2764) | 24 | 76 | — | — |
|
|
QALYs (range: 0-1) | −486 (−1894 to 906) | 0.0075 (−0015 to 0.016) | Dominanti | 22 | 73 | 2 | 3 |
| Sensitivity analysis 3l | ||||||||
|
|
QALYs (range: 0-1) | −386 (−1794 to 1006) | 0.00186 (−0.010 to 0.014) | Dominanti | 49 | 14 | 22 | 16 |
aIn line with the best practice ISPOR guidelines on ‘Model Parameter Estimation and Uncertainty’ we did not report negative incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) as they are meaningless. Instead we used the term dominant which implies that the intervention has a higher effect and less cost compared with the WLC.
bThe north-east quadrant of the CE plane, indicating that intervention is more effective and more costly.
cThe south-east quadrant of the CE plane, indicating that intervention is more effective and less costly.
dThe south-west quadrant of the CE plane, indicating that intervention is less effective and less costly.
eThe north-west quadrant of the CE plane, indicating that intervention is less effective and more costly.
fP<.05.
gThe distribution of the ICERs (N=5000) sums to 100%. If the distribution only falls into 2 quadrants, there will not be any ICER in the other 2 quadrants (= 0%).
hQALYs: quality-adjusted life years.
iA dependably accurate 95% confidence interval for this distribution cannot be defined because there is no line through the origin that excludes alpha/2 of the distribution.
jSensitivity analysis 1 analyses not including in-patient care.
kSensitivity analysis 2 analyses adding €±100 of intervention costs.
lSensitivity analysis 3 analyses for EQ5D quality-adjusted life years.