Scenario input table economics evaluation - Assignment Example

Base, Best and Worst Scenario Analysis Question one The per-act HIV infection without PEP refers to people who are exposedto HIV and do not take PEP treatments after each sexual exposure. Relatively high values of Pr PROB have been used as the input values for the Best case scenario because they are the largest values of the infection rate recorded of those exposed to HIV and are infected due to lack of PEP administration. (Aaker, 2001)Probability of PEP side effects (Pr SIDE) lowest values are selected as the Best values because the probability that the victims are affected by PEP are best when their probability rate is minimum.

The best values of Pr SIDE are those of people who are least affected by PEP. The side effects are disastrous and therefore the least values of the side effects are the best values for this case scenario. (Aaker, 2001)Question twoScenarioCostIncrementalCostEffectsIncremental EffectICERBase CasePEP$ 1029.8$258.621.4188 QALY0.0195 QALY$ 13231.24No-PEP$ 771.221.3993 QALYWorstPEP$ 1095.8$ 1033.715.9781 QALY-0.0154 QALYDominatedNo-PEP$ 62.215.9935 QALYBestPEP$ 2614.636.488 QALYNo-PEP$ 9046.8$ $ 6432.235.944 QALY-0.

544 QALYDominatedQuestion threeBase and worst case scenario analysis involves the analysis of either the most positive or most negative outcome of a decision or action. Both positive and negative outcomes are evaluated in this analysis. These scenarios are considered in relation to the Base value. The base value is therefore the initial value or the average value of the case scenario or case. The best and worst case scenario analysis allow the parties involved to make better decisions about the case under study.

(Aaker, 2001) Question fourThe table of results shows that the best case has a higher cost than that of the worst case. Under the best curve, the cost of No-PEP was higher than that of when PEP was administered. The cost of No-PEP in the worst scenario was lower than the cost of PEP administration. These values indicate that for the best scenario to occur, the policy maker must spend a comparatively higher amount of funds than that of worst case scenario. (Aaker, 2001)ReferenceAaker, A. D. (2001).

Strategic Market Management. New York: John Wiley.