The cost-effectiveness ratio amounted to ATS64,100. This means that the inpatient costs of treating a patient must be higher than ATS64,100 for prevention to be cost-effective. The question posed was, therefore, how high must hospital costs be in order for prevention to be actually cost-saving. Using the wholesale price for prevention and treatment, the figure is reduced to ATS43,641. If the ulcer treatment is carried out using a combination of ranticidin and sulcrafat the costs is ATS59,798 or, in wholesale price terms, ATS40,599. The sensitivity analysis showed that the model is especially sensitive to changes in the ulcer rate in the control group and the hospitalisation rate. Changes in the efficacy of the treatment and compliance altered the results to a lesser extent. The model is especially sensitive to changes in the ulcer rate of the control group. An increase in the ulcer probability by a factor of 1.29 reduces the threshold of cost-effectiveness by over 34% to just over ATS42,000. A reduction of 0.69 increases it by nearly 87% to ATS120,000. The model is also sensitive to changes in the hospitalisation rate. A 5% reduction increases the cost threshold by 30%. An increase of 5% reduces the cost threshold by 19%.