Cost-effectiveness analysis of the national decentralization policy of antiretroviral treatment programme in Zambia

Table 4 One-way sensitivity analysis

	Base	Ranges (low–high)	ICER	Decision^a	Decision threshold
Mortality of PLHIV retained in ART (%)	9.4	4.0–17.0	1768.08		11.7
			−55960.74	Dominated
Utility of PLHIV retained in ART	0.82	0.62–0.98	−4444.94	Dominated	0.78
			1270.60
Age of reference PLHIV (years old)	30	20–50	902.31		32.7
			−2371.56	Dominated
Mortality of PLHIV not retained in ART (%)	37.5	27.0–51.0	1131.96		39.3
			−2038.67	Dominated
Discount rate (%)	3.0	0.0–15.0	4878.31	Dominated	1.0
			1972.75
Cost of the original programme (USD)	246.45	123.23–492.90	4356.33	Dominated	134.95
			182.74
Cost of the intervention programme (USD)	250.13	125.10–500.26	92.18		304.9
			8712.78	Dominated
Retention rate (%)	5% reduction per year	Best scenario	1644.71		–
		Original: 10% reduction/year
		Intervention: 3% reduction/year
		Worst scenario	4365.34	Dominated
		Original: 3% reduction/year
		Intervention: 10% reduction/year

This table lists detailed data of the ICER changes and the lowest and highest values of each variable. For negative ICER values (less than zero) or those above our cost-effectiveness threshold, the final decision column indicates ‘dominated’, meaning more costly and less effective or less costly and less cost effective
ICER incremental cost effectiveness ratio, PLHIV people living with HIV, ART antiretroviral treatment
^a Dominated interventions are either more costly and less effective or less costly and less cost-effective

ISSN: 1478-7547