Cargando…

Assessing direct healthcare costs when restricted to self-reported data: a scoping review

BACKGROUND: In the absence of electronic health records, analysis of direct healthcare costs often relies on resource utilisation data collected from patient-reported surveys. This scoping review explored the availability, use and methodological details of self-reported healthcare service utilisatio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jabakhanji, Samira B., Sorensen, Jan, Valentelyte, Gintare, Burke, Lee Ann, McElroy, Brendan, Murphy, Aileen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8444520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34529165
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13561-021-00330-2
_version_ 1784568511262097408
author Jabakhanji, Samira B.
Sorensen, Jan
Valentelyte, Gintare
Burke, Lee Ann
McElroy, Brendan
Murphy, Aileen
author_facet Jabakhanji, Samira B.
Sorensen, Jan
Valentelyte, Gintare
Burke, Lee Ann
McElroy, Brendan
Murphy, Aileen
author_sort Jabakhanji, Samira B.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In the absence of electronic health records, analysis of direct healthcare costs often relies on resource utilisation data collected from patient-reported surveys. This scoping review explored the availability, use and methodological details of self-reported healthcare service utilisation and cost data to assess healthcare costs in Ireland. METHODS: Population health surveys were identified from Irish data repositories and details were collated in an inventory to inform the literature search. Irish cost studies published in peer-reviewed and grey sources from 2009 to 2019 were included if they used self-reported data on healthcare utilisation or cost. Two independent researchers extracted studies’ details and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines were used for reporting. RESULTS: In total, 27 surveys were identified containing varying details of healthcare utilisation/cost, health status, demographic characteristics and health-related risk and behaviour. Of those surveys, 21 were general population surveys and six were study-specific ad-hoc surveys. Furthermore, 14 cost studies were identified which used retrospective self-reported data on healthcare utilisation or cost from ten of the identified surveys. Nine of these cost studies used ad-hoc surveys and five used data from pre-existing population surveys. Compared to population surveys, ad-hoc surveys contained more detailed information on resource use, albeit with smaller sample sizes. Recall periods ranged from 1 week for frequently used services to 1 year for rarer service use, or longer for once-off costs. A range of perspectives (societal, healthcare and public sector) and costing approaches (bottom-up costing and a mix of top-down and bottom-up) were used. The majority of studies (n = 11) determined unit prices using multiple sources, including national healthcare tariffs, literature and expert views. Moreover, most studies (n = 13) reported limitations concerning data availability, risk of bias and generalisability. Various sampling, data collection and analysis strategies were employed to minimise these. CONCLUSION: Population surveys can aid cost assessments in jurisdictions that lack electronic health records, unique patient identifiers and data interoperability. To increase utilisation, researchers wanting to conduct cost analyses need to be aware of and have access to existing data sources. Future population surveys should be designed to address reported limitations and capture comprehensive health-related, demographic and resource use data. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13561-021-00330-2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8444520
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84445202021-09-17 Assessing direct healthcare costs when restricted to self-reported data: a scoping review Jabakhanji, Samira B. Sorensen, Jan Valentelyte, Gintare Burke, Lee Ann McElroy, Brendan Murphy, Aileen Health Econ Rev Review BACKGROUND: In the absence of electronic health records, analysis of direct healthcare costs often relies on resource utilisation data collected from patient-reported surveys. This scoping review explored the availability, use and methodological details of self-reported healthcare service utilisation and cost data to assess healthcare costs in Ireland. METHODS: Population health surveys were identified from Irish data repositories and details were collated in an inventory to inform the literature search. Irish cost studies published in peer-reviewed and grey sources from 2009 to 2019 were included if they used self-reported data on healthcare utilisation or cost. Two independent researchers extracted studies’ details and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines were used for reporting. RESULTS: In total, 27 surveys were identified containing varying details of healthcare utilisation/cost, health status, demographic characteristics and health-related risk and behaviour. Of those surveys, 21 were general population surveys and six were study-specific ad-hoc surveys. Furthermore, 14 cost studies were identified which used retrospective self-reported data on healthcare utilisation or cost from ten of the identified surveys. Nine of these cost studies used ad-hoc surveys and five used data from pre-existing population surveys. Compared to population surveys, ad-hoc surveys contained more detailed information on resource use, albeit with smaller sample sizes. Recall periods ranged from 1 week for frequently used services to 1 year for rarer service use, or longer for once-off costs. A range of perspectives (societal, healthcare and public sector) and costing approaches (bottom-up costing and a mix of top-down and bottom-up) were used. The majority of studies (n = 11) determined unit prices using multiple sources, including national healthcare tariffs, literature and expert views. Moreover, most studies (n = 13) reported limitations concerning data availability, risk of bias and generalisability. Various sampling, data collection and analysis strategies were employed to minimise these. CONCLUSION: Population surveys can aid cost assessments in jurisdictions that lack electronic health records, unique patient identifiers and data interoperability. To increase utilisation, researchers wanting to conduct cost analyses need to be aware of and have access to existing data sources. Future population surveys should be designed to address reported limitations and capture comprehensive health-related, demographic and resource use data. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13561-021-00330-2. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-09-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8444520/ /pubmed/34529165 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13561-021-00330-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis 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
Jabakhanji, Samira B.
Sorensen, Jan
Valentelyte, Gintare
Burke, Lee Ann
McElroy, Brendan
Murphy, Aileen
Assessing direct healthcare costs when restricted to self-reported data: a scoping review
title Assessing direct healthcare costs when restricted to self-reported data: a scoping review
title_full Assessing direct healthcare costs when restricted to self-reported data: a scoping review
title_fullStr Assessing direct healthcare costs when restricted to self-reported data: a scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Assessing direct healthcare costs when restricted to self-reported data: a scoping review
title_short Assessing direct healthcare costs when restricted to self-reported data: a scoping review
title_sort assessing direct healthcare costs when restricted to self-reported data: a scoping review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8444520/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34529165
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13561-021-00330-2
work_keys_str_mv AT jabakhanjisamirab assessingdirecthealthcarecostswhenrestrictedtoselfreporteddataascopingreview
AT sorensenjan assessingdirecthealthcarecostswhenrestrictedtoselfreporteddataascopingreview
AT valentelytegintare assessingdirecthealthcarecostswhenrestrictedtoselfreporteddataascopingreview
AT burkeleeann assessingdirecthealthcarecostswhenrestrictedtoselfreporteddataascopingreview
AT mcelroybrendan assessingdirecthealthcarecostswhenrestrictedtoselfreporteddataascopingreview
AT murphyaileen assessingdirecthealthcarecostswhenrestrictedtoselfreporteddataascopingreview