Table 5 Cost-effectiveness analysis results over the CRICERVA study by age group
Age | Incremental coverage (%) | ICER(1) | ICER(2) |
|---|---|---|---|
Women < 40 | |||
No intervention (NIG) | |||
IG1 (letter) | 13.8% | 3.55 | 3.55 (IG1 vs NIG) |
IG2 (letter + leaflet) | 13.8% | 13.33 | more expensive (IG2 vs IG1) |
IG3 (letter + leaflet + phone call) | 15.2% | 19.60 | 177.86 (IG3 vs IG1) |
Women 40-49 | |||
No intervention (NIG) | |||
IG1 (letter) | 20.9% | 2.34 | 2.34 (IG1 vs NIG) |
IG2 (letter + leaflet) | 17.8% | 10.34 | Dominated (IG2 vs IG1) |
IG3 (letter + leaflet + phone call) | 23.6% | 12.63 | 92.22 (IG3 vs IG1) |
Women 50-59 | |||
No intervention (NIG) | |||
IG1 (letter) | 17.6% | 2.78 | 2.78 (IG1 vs NIG) |
IG2 (letter + leaflet) | 16.7% | 11.02 | Dominated (IG2 vs IG1) |
IG3 (letter + leaflet + phone call) | 24.3% | 12.26 | 37.16 (IG3 vs IG1) |
Women ≥ 60 | |||
No intervention (NIG) | |||
IG1 (letter) | 20.3% | 2.41 | 2.41 (IG1 vs NIG) |
IG2 (letter + leaflet) | 21.6% | 8.52 | 103.85 (IG2 vs IG1) |
IG3 (letter + leaflet + phone call) | 28.4% | 10.49 | 16.76 (IG3 vs IG1) |