Table 9.

Impact of productivity loss inclusion on incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with and without inclusion of premature mortality

Impact1	Without premature mortality (n = 186)	With premature mortality2 (n = 22)	Total (N = 208)
More favorable	97 (52%)	13 (59%)	110 (53%)
No substantial impact	16 (9%)	0 (0%)	16 (8%)
Less favorable	17 (9%)	1 (5%)	18 (9%)
Not reported	56 (30%)	8 (36%)	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 “without premature mortality” and “with premature mortality” excluding “not reported” yielded a p value of 0.2685