Skip to main content

Table 3 Sensitivity analyses S1-S8 in pooled data

From: Dexmedetomidine versus standard care sedation with propofol or midazolam in intensive care: an economic evaluation

Sensitivity analysis of the pooled data: dexmedetomidine versus standard care sedatives Difference in mean costs, € Difference in median costs, €
S1. Standard sedative cost set to zero −1,545 −2,515
S2. Dexmedetomidine cost increased to €22 per 200 μg (€0.11 per 1 μg) −1,580 −2,591
S3. Cost of a NIV day (24 hours) decreased to €1,390 −1,779 −2,717
S4. Cost of a NIV day (24 hours) increased to €1,850 −1,614 −2,551
S5. Patients with observed data from all three time periods (no censoring, no imputation). N (dexmedetomidine): 366; N (standard care): 391 −3,213 −2,462
S6. Patients of those 18 study centers, from which the ICU unit costs were obtained. N (dexmedetomidine): 170; N (standard care): 166 −1,763 −4,567
S7a. TISS-based total ICU costs, at unit cost of €40 per TISS point −1,499 −1,448
S7b. TISS-based total ICU costs, at unit cost of €50 per TISS point −1,926 −1,782
S8a. Only declining direct variable daily costs included, assuming they represent 25% of total ICU costs −256 −515
S8b. Only declining direct variable daily costs included, assuming they represent 50% of total ICU costs −720 −1,343
  1. The impact of using alternative assumptions for the unit costs was tested. Additionally, cost difference between treatment groups was evaluated in two subpopulations and through applying a different type of costing method based on the mean cumulative sum of daily TISS (Therapeutic Intervention Scoring System) points throughout the entire intensive care unit (ICU) stay with two different unit costs. Finally, two analyses including only direct variable costs are presented (8a-b). Further details of analyses S5-S8 can be found in Additional files 7, 8, and 9: Tables S4-8. NIV, non-invasive ventilation.