Cost-effectiveness analysis is a common tool to support decision makers in the comparison of different health care interventions for the same purpose. In ACTIVAGE protocol ICER has been selected as a ratio to measure the cost-effectiveness of the assessed technologies.
The ICER was calculated by dividing the difference between the total costs of the intervention based on IoT and the total cost of the current intervention by the chosen measure of health outcome, in this case, the QALY calculated from the results of the quality of life from the EQ5D3L and SPQ. The ICER results were compared with a predetermined threshold in order to decide what is the most efficient use of resources.
When considering the self-perceived outcomes RUC1 and RUC6 have positive outcomes. With theses values, ICER results are positive in these RUCs. This suggests that in terms of self-perceived quality of life, the IoT based interventions is more effective and equally costly than the current intervention.
When looking at the gains in QALYs for RUC2, the results showed an increase by 0.153 QALYs over the subjects’ lifetime at an increasing lifetime cost of € 5.743,4 and an ICER of 37.544,6 €/QALY. In this case, the threshold includes both the one of the public payer (e.g. the ministry of health) and the one of the final beneficiary of the intervention who may be required to pay part or all of the intervention’s costs.