Skip to main content

Table 5 Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and distribution of the joint cost-effect pairs in the cost-effectiveness planes of the phone group resulting from the main analyses and the sensitivity analyses

From: Economic evaluation of a weight control program with e-mail and telephone counseling among overweight employees: a randomized controlled trial

 Analysis a Sample size per group ΔC (95% CI) ΔE (95% CI)   Distribution in CE plane (%)
  Control Phone Euros Weight loss (kg) ICER NE b SE c SW d NW e
Main 448 453 352 (−462; 1095) 0.3 (−0.6; 1.3) 1009 65 14 6 16
Complete cases 134 147 593 (−157; 1458) 1.1 (−0.02; 2.2) 543 91 7 0 2
Company perspective 448 453 270 (−525; 997) 0.3 (−0.6; 1.3) 772 62 17 7 13
     QALY ICUR     
Main 448 453 352 (−490; 1099) 0.001 (−0.03; 0.03) 245,242 41 14 5 40
Complete cases 120 140 423 (−458; 1250) 0.006 (−0.04; 0.05) 131,863 50 13 3 34
Company perspective 448 453 270 (−525; 997 0.001 (−0.03; 0.03) 187,545 37 17 8 38
UK tariff 448 453 352 (−490; 1099) 0.007 (−0.04;0.05) 52,496 50 13 7 30
  1. a In the analysis ΔC= mean difference in total costs, ΔE= mean difference in outcome, ICER (ICUR) =incremental cost-effectiveness (utility) ratio calculated as ΔC/ΔE. In the main analysis missing data were multiply imputed. The complete cases analysis was restricted to participants with complete cost and effect data. b Northeast quadrant of the CE-plane: the intervention is more effective and more costly than self-help brochures. c Southeast quadrant of the CE-plane: the intervention is more effective and less costly than self-help brochures. d Southwest quadrant of the CE-plane: the intervention is less effective and less costly than self-help brochures. e Northwest quadrant of the CE-plane: the intervention is less effective and more costly than self-help brochures.