Skip to main content

Table 2 Cost-effectiveness analysis for the comparison of PA vs B + P vs C + P a

From: Cost-effectiveness of child caries management: a randomised controlled trial (FiCTION trial)

Investigation strategy

Cost [£] [97.5% CI]b

Incremental cost [£]

[97.5% CI]b c

Incidence [97.5% CI]b

Incremental incidence

[97.5% CI]b c

ICERc [£]

Incremental cost per incidence of dental pain and/or infection avoided

PA (n = 354)

206 [176 to 237]

 

0.44 [0.39 to 0.50]

  

B + P (n = 352)

226 [201 to 252]

19 [−18 to 55]

0.39 [0.33 to 0.45]

−0.058 [−0.14 to 0.02]

328

C + P (n = 352)

245 [219 to 271]

 

0.41 [0.35 to 0.47]

 

Dominated by B + P

Incremental cost per episode of dental pain and/or infection avoided

Investigation strategy

Cost [£]

[97.5% CI]b

Incremental cost [£]

[97.5% CI]b c

Episodes

[97.5% CI]b

Incremental episodes

[97.5% CI]b c

ICER c [£]

PA (n = 354)

206 [176 to 237]

 

0.70 [0.58 to 0.82]

  

B + P (n = 352)

226 [201 to 252]

19 [−18 to 55]

0.56 [0.46 to 0.67]

−0.143 [−0.29 to 0.01]

133

C + P (n = 352)

245 [219 to 271]

 

0.60 [0.49 to 0.71]

 

Dominated by B + P

  1. a costs and effects are discounted at 3.5%; b 97.5% CI was used as it adjusts for multiple comparisons and should be interpreted as if it were a 95% CI; c estimated based on adjusted analysis (n = 1057; n = 1 child missing information on age); d ICER = incremental cost-effectiveness ratio