Skip to main content

Table 2 Cost-effectiveness of ECT and esketamine main model - base case and sensitivity analysis

From: Cost-utility analysis of esketamine and electroconvulsive therapy in adults with treatment-resistant depression

  ECT Esketamine Incremental ICER
Cost QALY Cost QALY Cost QALY
Base case
  Societal perspective 453,693 14.85 456,211 14.26 −2517 0.59 ECT dominatesa
  Healthcare perspective 124,530 14.85 120,390 14.26 4140 0.59 6969
Sensitivity analysis
  (1a) Doubling the productivity loss 681,736 14.85 688,301 14.26 −6565 0.59 ECT dominates
  (1b) Halving the productivity loss 339,673 14.85 340,165 14.26 −493 0.59 ECT dominates
  (2a) ECT six times per cycle – societal 450,071 14.85 456,211 14.26 −6140 0.59 ECT dominates
  (2b) ECT six times per cycle – healthcare 121,026 14.85 120,390 14.26 636 0.59 1070
  (2c) ECT 12 times per cycle – societal 460,939 14.85 456,211 14.26 4728 0.59 7959
  (2d) ECT 12 times per cycle – healthcare 131,539 14.85 120,390 14.26 11,149 0.59 18,768
  (3a) Increasing the remission rate from esketamine to 0.5 – societal 453,694 14.85 458,449 14.36 −4755 0.49 ECT dominates
  (3b) Increasing the remission rate from esketamine to 0.5 – healthcare 124,530 14.85 123,583 14.36 947 0.49 1927
  (4a) Decreasing the remission rate from ECT to 0.5 – societal 453,364 14.42 456,211 14.26 −2847 0.16 ECT dominates
  (4b) Decreasing the remission rate from ECT to 0.5 – healthcare 119,350 14.42 120,390 14.26 −1040 0.16 ECT dominates
  (5a) Increasing the remission rate the 2nd time the individuals received ECT/esketamine 0.9 – societal 448,644 16.15 472,803 15.08 −24,159 1.08 ECT dominates
  (5b) Increasing the remission rate the 2nd time the individuals received ECT/esketamine 0.9 – healthcare 141,026 16.15 148,069 15.08 −7044 1.08 ECT dominates
  (6a) Five-year time horizon – societal 105,078 3.00 116,086 2.81 −11,008 0.19 ECT dominates
  (6b) Five-year time horizon – healthcare 31,691 3.00 31,284 2.81 406 0.19 2086
  (7a) Lowering QALYs (0.3) for ECT treatment during depression and increasing QALYs (0.85) for remission after esketamine and AD – societal 453,694 15.04 456,211 14.54 −2517 0.5 ECT dominates
  (7b) Lowering QALYs (0.3) for ECT treatment during depression and increasing QALYs (0.85) for remission after esketamine and AD – healthcare 124,530 15.04 120,390 14.54 4140 0.5 8296
  (8a) Esketamine was given as long as the individual was in remission – societal 453,694 14.85 458,749 14.41 −5055 0.45 ECT dominates
  (8b) Esketamine was given as long as the individual was in remission – healthcare 124,530 14.85 124,358 14.41 172 0.45 387
  (9a) No discounting applied – societal 466,497 15.22 469,603 14.60 −3106 0.61 ECT dominates
  (9b) No discounting applied – healthcare 127,589 15.22 123,191 14.60 4399 0.61 7156
  1. a Dominates = more QALY at a lower cost
  2. Costs are displayed in British pounds (GBP) 2019