Impact of stakeholder perspectives on cost-effectiveness estimates of four specialized nutritious foods for preventing stunting and wasting in children 6–23 months in Burkina Faso

Table 5 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Based on Hypothetical Control Scenarios for Cost per Additional Stunting Case Averted¹

	CSB+ w/oil		SC+		RUSF		CSWB w/oil
Adjusted Prevalence Of Stunting At End-Line In Hypothetical Control	Stunting Averted, Percentage Points²	Cost Per Additional Stunting Case Averted¹	Stunting Averted, Percentage Points	Cost Per Additional Stunting Case Averted¹	Stunting Averted, Percentage Points	Cost Per Additional Stunting Case Averted¹	Stunting Averted, Percentage Points	Cost Per Additional Stunting Case Averted¹
21.1%	1.0	12,659	0.8	30,364	−0.8	Dominated³	−6.4	Dominated³
25.1%	5.0	2532	4.8	4955	3.2	8048	−2.4	Dominated³
31.1%	10.0	1266	9.8	2422	8.2	3117	2.6	5668
36.1%	15.0	844	14.8	1602	13.2	1933	7.6	1924
41.1%	20.0	633	19.8	1197	18.2	1401	12.6	1159
46.1%	25.0	506	24.8	956	23.2	1098	17.6	829

¹ Cost per additional stunting case averted for each intervention arm was calculated as the incremental cost per child divided by incremental % stunting averted at end-line between the respective intervention arm and the specified hypothetical control value. Cost (in USD) and effectiveness (in %) results used in this analysis excluded LTFU
² CSB+ w/oil had the lowest point estimate for stunting, and thus was used to construct hypothetical control values by adding 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 percentage points. The maximum value of 25 percentage points was determined based on Burkina Faso DHS data in 2010
^{3 “}Dominated” is an economic evaluation term to describe an intervention arm being both more expensive and less or equally effective compared the comparator (in this case the hypothetical control) which rules out the need to calculate an ICER

ISSN: 1475-2891