Cargando…
The use of micro-costing in economic analyses of surgical interventions: a systematic review
BACKGROUND: Compared with conventional top down costing, micro-costing may provide a more accurate method of resource-use assessment in economic analyses of surgical interventions, but little is known about its current use. The aim of this study was to systematically-review the use of micro-costing...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6990532/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31997021 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13561-020-0260-8 |
_version_ | 1783492521231384576 |
---|---|
author | Potter, Shelley Davies, Charlotte Davies, Gareth Rice, Caoimhe Hollingworth, William |
author_facet | Potter, Shelley Davies, Charlotte Davies, Gareth Rice, Caoimhe Hollingworth, William |
author_sort | Potter, Shelley |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Compared with conventional top down costing, micro-costing may provide a more accurate method of resource-use assessment in economic analyses of surgical interventions, but little is known about its current use. The aim of this study was to systematically-review the use of micro-costing in surgery. METHODS: Comprehensive searches identified complete papers, published in English reporting micro-costing of surgical interventions up to and including 22nd June 2018. Studies were critically appraised using a modified version of the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) Checklist. Study demographics and details of resources identified; methods for measuring and valuing identified resources and any cost-drivers identified in each study were summarised. RESULTS: A total of 85 papers were identified. Included studies were mainly observational comparative studies (n = 42, 49.4%) with few conducted in the context of a randomised trial (n = 5, 5.9%). The majority of studies were single-centre (n = 66, 77.6%) and almost half (n = 40, 47.1%) collected data retrospectively. Only half (n = 46, 54.1%) self-identified as being ‘micro-costing’ studies. Rationale for the use of micro-costing was most commonly to compare procedures/techniques/processes but over a third were conducted specifically to accurately assess costs and/or identify cost-drivers. The most commonly included resources were personnel costs (n = 76, 89.4%); materials/disposables (n = 76, 89.4%) and operating-room costs (n = 62,72.9%). No single resource was included in all studies. Most studies (n = 72, 84.7%) identified key cost-drivers for their interventions. CONCLUSIONS: There is lack of consistency regarding the current use of micro-costing in surgery. Standardising terminology and focusing on identifying and accurately costing key cost-drivers may improve the quality and value of micro-costing in future studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration CRD42018099604. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6990532 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-69905322020-02-03 The use of micro-costing in economic analyses of surgical interventions: a systematic review Potter, Shelley Davies, Charlotte Davies, Gareth Rice, Caoimhe Hollingworth, William Health Econ Rev Review BACKGROUND: Compared with conventional top down costing, micro-costing may provide a more accurate method of resource-use assessment in economic analyses of surgical interventions, but little is known about its current use. The aim of this study was to systematically-review the use of micro-costing in surgery. METHODS: Comprehensive searches identified complete papers, published in English reporting micro-costing of surgical interventions up to and including 22nd June 2018. Studies were critically appraised using a modified version of the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) Checklist. Study demographics and details of resources identified; methods for measuring and valuing identified resources and any cost-drivers identified in each study were summarised. RESULTS: A total of 85 papers were identified. Included studies were mainly observational comparative studies (n = 42, 49.4%) with few conducted in the context of a randomised trial (n = 5, 5.9%). The majority of studies were single-centre (n = 66, 77.6%) and almost half (n = 40, 47.1%) collected data retrospectively. Only half (n = 46, 54.1%) self-identified as being ‘micro-costing’ studies. Rationale for the use of micro-costing was most commonly to compare procedures/techniques/processes but over a third were conducted specifically to accurately assess costs and/or identify cost-drivers. The most commonly included resources were personnel costs (n = 76, 89.4%); materials/disposables (n = 76, 89.4%) and operating-room costs (n = 62,72.9%). No single resource was included in all studies. Most studies (n = 72, 84.7%) identified key cost-drivers for their interventions. CONCLUSIONS: There is lack of consistency regarding the current use of micro-costing in surgery. Standardising terminology and focusing on identifying and accurately costing key cost-drivers may improve the quality and value of micro-costing in future studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration CRD42018099604. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-01-29 /pmc/articles/PMC6990532/ /pubmed/31997021 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13561-020-0260-8 Text en © The Author(s). 2020 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. |
spellingShingle | Review Potter, Shelley Davies, Charlotte Davies, Gareth Rice, Caoimhe Hollingworth, William The use of micro-costing in economic analyses of surgical interventions: a systematic review |
title | The use of micro-costing in economic analyses of surgical interventions: a systematic review |
title_full | The use of micro-costing in economic analyses of surgical interventions: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | The use of micro-costing in economic analyses of surgical interventions: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | The use of micro-costing in economic analyses of surgical interventions: a systematic review |
title_short | The use of micro-costing in economic analyses of surgical interventions: a systematic review |
title_sort | use of micro-costing in economic analyses of surgical interventions: a systematic review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6990532/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31997021 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13561-020-0260-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pottershelley theuseofmicrocostingineconomicanalysesofsurgicalinterventionsasystematicreview AT daviescharlotte theuseofmicrocostingineconomicanalysesofsurgicalinterventionsasystematicreview AT daviesgareth theuseofmicrocostingineconomicanalysesofsurgicalinterventionsasystematicreview AT ricecaoimhe theuseofmicrocostingineconomicanalysesofsurgicalinterventionsasystematicreview AT hollingworthwilliam theuseofmicrocostingineconomicanalysesofsurgicalinterventionsasystematicreview AT pottershelley useofmicrocostingineconomicanalysesofsurgicalinterventionsasystematicreview AT daviescharlotte useofmicrocostingineconomicanalysesofsurgicalinterventionsasystematicreview AT daviesgareth useofmicrocostingineconomicanalysesofsurgicalinterventionsasystematicreview AT ricecaoimhe useofmicrocostingineconomicanalysesofsurgicalinterventionsasystematicreview AT hollingworthwilliam useofmicrocostingineconomicanalysesofsurgicalinterventionsasystematicreview |