A cost utility analysis alongside a cluster-randomised trial evaluating a minor ailment service compared to usual care in community pharmacy

Table 3 Cost utility analysis MAS CP vs. UC CP. Effectiveness measured as QALY

	Total Cost^b	Cost Diff (mean)	QALY^b	QALY Diff	ICER (€/QALY)	Probability of cost effectiveness
	Total Cost^b	Cost Diff (mean)	QALY^b	QALY Diff	ICER (€/QALY)	WTP 20,000€	WTP 25,000€	WTP 30.000
All sample
Multiple imputation (base case)
UC CP^a	10.68		0.0246
MAS CP^a	17.19	6.51	0.0247	0.0003	19,325	52.39%	66.45%	75.36%
Complete Cases
UC CP^a	12.61		0.0245
MAS CP^a	20.03	7.42	0.0248	0.0003	24,733	36.19%	47.40%	60.10%
Subgroup with symptom presentation
Multiple imputation (base case for subgroup analysis)
UC CP^a	10.35		0.0245
MAS CP*	19.48	9.13	0.0247	0.0002	42,322	14.09%	23.92%	33.15%
Complete Cases
UC CP^a	12.59		0.0245
MAS CP^a	22.97	10.45	0.0248	0.0002	48,126	11.20%	17.39%	24.40%
Subgroup with direct product request
Multiple imputation (base case for subgroup analysis)
UC CP^a	11.59		0.0242
MAS CP^a	11.90	0.31	0.0248	0.0006	523	96.83%	97.32%	97.58%
Complete Cases
UC CP*	14.25		0.0247
MAS CP^a	13.54	−0.71	0.0249	0.0006	Dominant	92.60%	93.69%	94.49%

^aUC CP Usual Care Community Pharmacy, MAS CP Minor Ailment Service Community Pharmacy
^bAdjusted by patient’s age and gender, minor ailment, symptom duration and QALY at baseline (first consultation in CP and other consultations such as GP or ED visits during the 10 days studied were considered)

ISSN: 1472-6963