Probabilistic results: pairwise comparison between current practices (strategy A) and the other strategies to assess for cost-effectiveness
| Pairwise comparison | Incremental cost per 100 VL suspects (US$) (95% CI) | Deaths averted per 100 VL suspects (95% CI) | Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) (95% CI) | ||
| Adoption of 6-day L-AmB (A vs B) | 54 298.89 | (52 296.60 to 56 301.19) | 3.93 (3.88 to 3.98) | 14 525.87 | (13 988.62 to 15 063.13) |
| Adoption of 2-day L-AmB (A vs C)* | 16 118.34 | (14 100.85 to 18 135.83) | 4.82 (4.77 to 4.88) | 3486.17 | (3059.34 to 3912.99) |
| Adoption of RDT (A vs D)† | −10 269.12 | (−11 126.68 to -9 411.56) | 0.21 (0.20 to 0.22) | −110 452.63 | (−168 853.88 to −52 051.38) |
| Adoption of RDT and 6-day L-AmB (A vs E) | 44 004.33 | (41 755.43 to 46 253.24) | 4.12 (4.07 to 4.17) | 11 045.70 | (10 472.13 to 11 619.27) |
| Adoption of RDT and 2-day L-AmB (A vs F)** | 5742.34 | (3 468.15 to 8 016.53) | 4.93 (4.87 to 4.98) | 1136.19 | (658.29 to 1614.09) |
*Cost-effective compared with current practices
** Highly cost-effective compared with current practices
† Dominates current practices
L-AmB,liposomal amphotericin B; RDT,rapid diagnostic test; VL, visceral leishmaniasis.