Table 5

Cost-effectiveness analysis of four scenarios over three time horizons

Time horizon	Strategy	Cost (US$)	Incremental cost (US$)	Effectiveness (QALY)	Incremental effectiveness (QALY)	Average CE (US$/QALY)	ICER (US$/QALY gained)
5 years	Scenario 1	675 295 149	–	14 648.48	–	46 100	–
	Scenario 2	669 379 513	−5 915 636	14 654.72	6.24	45 677	−948 116–Dominant*
	Scenario 3	682 773 581	7 478 432	14 842.97	194.49	46 000	38 452
	Scenario 4	676 857 946	1 562 796	14 849.21	200.73	45 582	7786
10 years	Scenario 1	1 528 113 805	–	33 254.00	–	45 953	–
	Scenario 2	1 511 150 003	−16 963 802	33 304.87	50.86	45 373	−333 515–Dominant*
	Scenario 3	1 550 558 669	22 444 864	34 065.07	811.06	45 518	27 673
	Scenario 4	1 533 594 867	5 481 062	34 115.93	861.93	44 952	6359
15 years	Scenario 1	2 535 371 764	–	55 291.30	–	45 855	–
	Scenario 2	2 506 579 188	−28 792 576	55 436.57	145.28	45 215	−198 192–Dominant*
	Scenario 3	2 582 584 093	47 212 328	57 124.27	1832.97	45 210	25 757
	Scenario 4	2 553 791 516	18 419 752	57 269.55	1978.25	44 592	9311

Scenario 1: A model that represents the current distribution of RRT modality (HD, 73%; PD, 14%; TX, 13%).
Scenario 2: A model with an increased proportion of incident RRT patients on PD at the expense of HD (HD, 47%; PD, 40%; TX, 13%).
Scenario 3: A model with an increased proportion of incident RRT patients on TX at the expense of HD (HD, 52%; PD, 14%; TX, 34%).
Scenario 4: A model with an increased proportion of incident RRT patients on PD and TX at the expense of HD (HD, 26%; PD, 40%; TX, 34%).
*Dominant: less costly and more effective.
HD, haemodialysis; ICER, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; PD, peritoneal dialysis; QALY, quality-adjusted life years; RRT, renal replacement therapy; TX, kidney transplantation.