Table 3.

Sensitivity analyses for cost-effectiveness of the EXER, CBT, and EXER+CBT interventions versus the UC intervention

	EXER vs. UC			CBT vs. UC			EXER+CBT vs. UC
	Incremental total cost ($)	Incremental QALY	ICER ($)	Incremental total cost ($)	Incremental QALY	ICER ($)	Incremental total cost ($)	Incremental QALY	ICER ($)
Base-case analysis∗	−313	0.382	Cost saving	596	0.290	2,058	403	0.690	585
Societal perspective	−126	0.382	Cost saving	822	0.290	2,838	805	0.690	1,167
5-year simulation time horizon	−340	0.214	Cost saving	473	0.163	2,904	266	0.387	687
Effectiveness: persistent intervention effects	−182	0.384	Cost saving	1,379	0.286	4,822	−4,266	0.712	Cost saving
Cost
400% increase of the cost for passes/memberships to fitness facilities†	204	0.382	533	596	0.290	2,058	919	0.690	1,332
50% increase of the hourly rate for CBT therapists	−313	0.382	Cost saving	943	0.290	3,256	773	0.690	1,120
50% increase of the hourly rate for exercise trainers	−217	0.382	Cost saving	596	0.290	2,058	486	0.690	705
400% increase of the cost for passes/memberships to fitness facilities† and 50% increase of the hourly rate for both CBT therapists and exercise trainers	299	0.382	784	943	0.290	3,256	1,371	0.690	1,987

^∗The base-case analysis was from the health care sector perspective over a 10-year simulation time horizon for the cost-effectiveness of the Program ACTIVE II interventions assuming the diminishing intervention effects after the end of the trial.

^†The cost of passes/memberships to fitness facilities was assumed to increase by 400%, which would provide participants with free access to fitness facilities for the first 3 months of the study period ($129 per participant in the base-case analysis) vs. for the total 15 months of the study period ($645 per participant in the sensitivity analysis).