Table 7.

Impact of productivity loss inclusion on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) by disease area

Impact1	Cardiovascular and metabolic (CVM) (n = 33)2	Immunology (n = 55)3	Central nervous system (CNS)/psychiatry (n = 42)4	Oncology (n = 25)	Respiratory/infectious (n = 27)5	Others (n = 26)6	Total (N = 208)
More favorable	18 (55%)	30 (55%)	23 (55%)	9 (36%)	16 (59%)	14 (54%)	110 (53%)
No substantial impact	6 (18%)	5 (9%)	2 (5%)	2 (8%)	0 (0%)	1 (4%)	16 (8%)
Less favorable	1 (3%)	4 (7%)	6 (14%)	2 (8%)	2 (7%)	3 (12%)	18 (9%)
Not reported	8 (24%)	16 (29%)	11 (26%)	12 (48%)	9 (33%)	8 (31%)	64 (31%)

¹Three of the included studies stated that productivity costs had a substantial impact without specifying the direction of impact. Studies were labeled as having a “more favorable” impact if inclusion of productivity costs resulted in a decrease in the ICER or an increase in the cost savings based on the specific cost figures provided or based on the comments of the author(s) when no specific figures were provided. Similarly, studies were labeled as having a “less favorable” impact if inclusion resulted in an increase in the ICER or a decrease in the cost savings. Studies were labeled as having “no substantial impact” if there was no change in the ICER with the inclusion of productivity costs or if their inclusion was reported by the author(s) as having no substantial impact and no specific figures were provided

²Chi-square test of oncology and CVM publications excluding “not reported” yielded a p value of 0.424

³Chi-square test of oncology and immunology publications excluding “not reported” yielded a p value of 0.841

⁴Chi-square test of oncology and CNS/psychiatry publications excluding “not reported” yielded a p value of 0.633

⁵Chi-square test of oncology and respiratory/infections publications excluding “not reported” yielded a p value of 0.198

⁶Chi-square test of oncology and other publications excluding “not reported” yielded a p value of 0.6585