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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Potter, Shelley, Davies, Charlotte, Davies, Gareth, Rice, Caoimhe, Hollingworth, William
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