Cargando…
NHS reference costs: a history and cautionary note
Historically, the NHS did not routinely collect cost data, unlike many countries with private insurance markets. In 1998, for the first time the government mandated NHS trusts to submit estimates of their costs of service, known as reference costs. These have informed a wide range of health economic...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10664521/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37991623 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13561-023-00469-0 |
_version_ | 1785148749916405760 |
---|---|
author | Amies-Cull, Ben Luengo-Fernandez, Ramon Scarborough, Peter Wolstenholme, Jane |
author_facet | Amies-Cull, Ben Luengo-Fernandez, Ramon Scarborough, Peter Wolstenholme, Jane |
author_sort | Amies-Cull, Ben |
collection | PubMed |
description | Historically, the NHS did not routinely collect cost data, unlike many countries with private insurance markets. In 1998, for the first time the government mandated NHS trusts to submit estimates of their costs of service, known as reference costs. These have informed a wide range of health economic evaluations and important functions in the health service, such as setting prices. Reference costs are collected by progressively disaggregating budgets top-down into disease and treatment groups. Despite ongoing improvements to methods and guidance, these submissions continued to suffer a lack of accuracy and comparability, fundamentally undermining their credibility for critical functions. To overcome these issues, there was a long-held ambition to collect “patient-level” cost data. Patient-level costs are estimated with a combination of disaggregating budgets but also capturing the patient-level “causality of costs” bottom-up in the allocation of resources to patient episodes. These not only aim to capture more of the drivers of costs, but also improve consistency of reporting between providers. The change in methods may confer improvements to data quality, though judgement is still required and achieving consistency between trusts will take further work. Estimated costs may also change in important ways that may take many years to fully understand. We end on a cautionary note that patient-level cost methods may unlock potential, they alone contribute little to our understanding of the complexities involved with service quality or need, while that potential will require substantial investment to realise. Many healthcare resources cannot be attributed to individual patients so the very notion of “patient-level” costs may be misplaced. High hopes have been put in these new data, though much more work is now necessary to understand their quality, what they show and how their use will impact the system. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10664521 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106645212023-11-22 NHS reference costs: a history and cautionary note Amies-Cull, Ben Luengo-Fernandez, Ramon Scarborough, Peter Wolstenholme, Jane Health Econ Rev Review Historically, the NHS did not routinely collect cost data, unlike many countries with private insurance markets. In 1998, for the first time the government mandated NHS trusts to submit estimates of their costs of service, known as reference costs. These have informed a wide range of health economic evaluations and important functions in the health service, such as setting prices. Reference costs are collected by progressively disaggregating budgets top-down into disease and treatment groups. Despite ongoing improvements to methods and guidance, these submissions continued to suffer a lack of accuracy and comparability, fundamentally undermining their credibility for critical functions. To overcome these issues, there was a long-held ambition to collect “patient-level” cost data. Patient-level costs are estimated with a combination of disaggregating budgets but also capturing the patient-level “causality of costs” bottom-up in the allocation of resources to patient episodes. These not only aim to capture more of the drivers of costs, but also improve consistency of reporting between providers. The change in methods may confer improvements to data quality, though judgement is still required and achieving consistency between trusts will take further work. Estimated costs may also change in important ways that may take many years to fully understand. We end on a cautionary note that patient-level cost methods may unlock potential, they alone contribute little to our understanding of the complexities involved with service quality or need, while that potential will require substantial investment to realise. Many healthcare resources cannot be attributed to individual patients so the very notion of “patient-level” costs may be misplaced. High hopes have been put in these new data, though much more work is now necessary to understand their quality, what they show and how their use will impact the system. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-11-22 /pmc/articles/PMC10664521/ /pubmed/37991623 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13561-023-00469-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Review Amies-Cull, Ben Luengo-Fernandez, Ramon Scarborough, Peter Wolstenholme, Jane NHS reference costs: a history and cautionary note |
title | NHS reference costs: a history and cautionary note |
title_full | NHS reference costs: a history and cautionary note |
title_fullStr | NHS reference costs: a history and cautionary note |
title_full_unstemmed | NHS reference costs: a history and cautionary note |
title_short | NHS reference costs: a history and cautionary note |
title_sort | nhs reference costs: a history and cautionary note |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10664521/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37991623 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13561-023-00469-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT amiescullben nhsreferencecostsahistoryandcautionarynote AT luengofernandezramon nhsreferencecostsahistoryandcautionarynote AT scarboroughpeter nhsreferencecostsahistoryandcautionarynote AT wolstenholmejane nhsreferencecostsahistoryandcautionarynote |