Cost-effectiveness modelling to optimise active screening strategy for gambiense human African trypanosomiasis in endemic areas of the Democratic Republic of Congo

Table 3 Active screening strategies considered in the probability of cost-effectiveness calculations

No.	Strategy	Screening coverage, c (%)	Screening interval, t (years)	Active zero- detections, z_a	Total cost (<DOLLAR/>)	Total DALYs	ACER (<DOLLAR/>/DALY)	ICER (<DOLLAR/>/DALY)
1	Passive surveillance only¹	0	N/A	N/A	25754 [12267, 40807]	2488.8 [1207.8, 3912.6]	Minimum cost	Minimum cost
2	Biennial screening with one zero for cessation	55	2	1	42517 [23546, 62968]	1338.9 [437.8,1755.7]	14.6	14.6²
3	Biennial screening with two zeros for cessation	55	2	2	43066 [24432, 63133]	1339.4 [436.3,1755.5]	15.1	Dominated
4	Biennial screening with three zeros for cessation	55	2	3	43501 [25092, 63266]	1340.1 [434.8,1756.5]	15.4	Dominated
5	Annual screening with one zero for cessation	55	1	1	48885 [26628, 72263]	1027.9 [570.3, 2262.7]	15.8	20.4³
6	Annual screening with two zeros for cessation	55	1	2	49571 [27896, 72428]	1027.7 [570.6, 2264.3]	16.3	2501.4⁴
7	Annual screening with three zeros for cessation	55	1	3	50163 [28670, 72806]	1027.4 [572.9, 2261.9]	16.7	2772.3⁵

¹The comparator strategy. ²Relative to Strategy 1. ³Relative to Strategy 2. ⁴Relative to Strategy 5. ⁵Relative to Strategy 6.
We show the mean total cost (to nearest dollar) and the total number of DALYs (to the nearest 0.1 DALYs) for each strategy with the 95% prediction intervals across all stochastic realisations. The ACER is the change in cost over the change in DALYs averted as compared to the baseline strategy, whilst the ICER is compared to the next best strategy (given in the table footnotes). Costs are denominated in 2018 US dollars

ISSN: 1741-7015