Skip to main content

Table 7 Projected incremental costs and health outcomes per person over 20 years

From: Social and behavioral risk reduction strategies for tuberculosis prevention in Canadian Inuit communities: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Costs per person and ICERs, PRECEDING STRATEGY AS COMPARATOR Incremental Cost
(95% UR)
Incremental Cost per
TB Case Averted
(95% UR)
Incremental Cost per
TB Death Averted
(95% UR)
Incremental Cost per
QALY Gained
(95% UR)
Status Quo
Tobacco Reduction Strategy $154 ($71 → $190) $95,835 ($20,365 → $310,345) $418,105 ($81,792 → $1,418,618) $49,671 ($9152 → $157,357)
Heavy Drinking Reduction Strategy $327 ($294 → $407) Dominateda Dominated Dominated
Food Insecurity Reduction Strategyb $1620 ($1602 → $1634) Dominated Dominated Dominated
Food Insecurity Reduction Strategy and Tobacco Reduction Strategyc $2103 ($2083 → $2116) $4,274,725 ($1,994,219 → $15,347,313) $52,609,991 ($17,372,467 → $217,605,661) $5,275,987 ($2,126,824 → $17,906,886)
Overcrowding Reduction Strategy $4826 ($4786 → $4911) Dominated Dominated Dominated
All Four Reduction Strategies in Combination $7566 ($7547 → $7578) $17,647,965 ($9,772,005 → $37,319,412) $160,913,981 ($60,384,312 → $472,384,673) $13,924,008 ($5,977,290 → $32,253,031)
  1. ICER Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio
  2. Negative values indicate cost savings compared to the preceding strategy
  3. aA strategy is dominated when it is both more costly and less effective than the preceding strategy
  4. bThe food insecurity reduction strategy is compared to the tobacco reduction strategy because the heavy drinking strategy is dominated. Because of this, the food insecurity strategy is dominated as well, due to extended dominance
  5. cThe combination of food insecurity reduction and smoking reduction is preferred to food security reduction alone, because of extended dominance. For that reason, incremental values are listed in comparison to the tobacco reduction strategy