Micro-costing studies in the health and medical literature: protocol for a systematic review

Xiao Xu, Holly K Grossetta Nardini, Jennifer Prah Ruger, Xiao Xu, Holly K Grossetta Nardini, Jennifer Prah Ruger

Abstract

Background: Micro-costing is a cost estimation method that allows for precise assessment of the economic costs of health interventions. It has been demonstrated to be particularly useful for estimating the costs of new interventions, for interventions with large variability across providers, and for estimating the true costs to the health system and to society. However, existing guidelines for economic evaluations do not provide sufficient detail of the methods and techniques to use when conducting micro-costing analyses. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to review the current literature on micro-costing studies of health and medical interventions, strategies, and programs to assess the variation in micro-costing methodology and the quality of existing studies. This will inform current practice in conducting and reporting micro-costing studies and lead to greater standardization in methodology in the future.

Methods/design: We will perform a systematic review of the current literature on micro-costing studies of health and medical interventions, strategies, and programs. Using rigorously designed search strategies, we will search Ovid MEDLINE, EconLit, BIOSIS Previews, Embase, Scopus, and the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) to identify relevant English-language articles. These searches will be supplemented by a review of the references of relevant articles identified. Two members of the review team will independently extract detailed information on the design and characteristics of each included article using a standardized data collection form. A third reviewer will be consulted to resolve discrepancies. We will use checklists that have been developed for critical appraisal of health economics studies to evaluate the quality and potential risk of bias of included studies.

Discussion: This systematic review will provide useful information to help standardize the methods and techniques for conducting and reporting micro-costing studies in research, which can improve the quality and transparency of future studies and enhance comparability and interpretation of findings. In the long run, these efforts will facilitate clinical and health policy decision-making about resource allocation.

Trial registration: Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42014007453.

References

    1. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1996.
    1. Tan SS, Rutten FF, van Ineveld BM, Redekop WK, Hakkaart-van Roijen L. Comparing methodologies for the cost estimation of hospital services. Eur J Health Econ. 2009;10:39–45. doi: 10.1007/s10198-008-0101-x.
    1. Heerey A, McGowan B, Ryan M, Barry M. Microcosting versus DRGs in the provision of cost estimates for use in pharmacoeconomic evaluation. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2002;2:29–33. doi: 10.1586/14737167.2.1.29.
    1. Clement Nee Shrive FM, Ghali WA, Donaldson C, Manns BJ. The impact of using different costing methods on the results of an economic evaluation of cardiac care: microcosting vs gross-costing approaches. Health Econ. 2009;18:377–388. doi: 10.1002/hec.1363.
    1. Ruger JP, Emmons KM, Kearney MH, Weinstein MC. Measuring the costs of outreach motivational interviewing for smoking cessation and relapse prevention among low-income pregnant women. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2009;9:46. doi: 10.1186/1471-2393-9-46.
    1. Barnett PG. An improved set of standards for finding cost for cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Care. 2009;47:S82–S88. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31819e1f3f.
    1. Frick KD. Microcosting quantity data collection methods. Med Care. 2009;47:S76–S81. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31819bc064.
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2535.
    1. Shemilt I, Mugford M, Byford S, Drummond M, Eisenstein E, Knapp M, Mallender J, McDaid D, Vale L, Walker D. In: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. (updated March 2011) Higgins JPT, Green S, editor. Oxford, UK: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. Chapter 15: Incorporating economics evidence. Available from .
    1. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, Boers M, Andersson N, Hamel C, Porter AC, Tugwell P, Moher D, Bouter LM. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2007;7:10. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-7-10.
    1. Xu X, Lazar C, Grossetta Nardini HK, Ruger JP. Micro-costing studies in the health and medical literature: a systematic review. PROSPERO; 2014. CRD42014007453 Available from .
    1. AcademyHealth. Health Economics Core Library Recommendations, 2011. Bethesda, MD: Funded by the U.S. National Library of Medicine; 2011. Available from .
    1. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, Augustovski F, Briggs AH, Mauskopf J, Loder E. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)–explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2013;16:231–250. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.02.002.
    1. Ruger JP, Emmons KM. Economic evaluations of smoking cessation and relapse prevention programs for pregnant women: a systematic review. Value Health. 2008;11:180–190. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00239.x.
    1. Ruger JP, Lazar CM. Economic evaluation of drug abuse treatment and HIV prevention programs in pregnant women: a systematic review. Addict Behav. 2012;37:1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2011.07.042.
    1. Ruger JP, Lazar CM. Economic evaluation of pharmaco- and behavioral therapies for smoking cessation: a critical and systematic review of empirical research. Annu Rev Public Health. 2012;33:279–305. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031811-124553.
    1. Ruger JP, Ben Abdallah A, Cottler L. Costs of HIV prevention among out-of-treatment drug-using women: results of a randomized controlled trial. Public Health Rep. 2010;125(Suppl 1):83–94.
    1. Ruger JP, Chawarski M, Mazlan M, Luekens C, Ng N, Schottenfeld R. Costs of addressing heroin addiction in Malaysia and 32 comparable countries worldwide. Health Serv Res. 2012;47:865–887. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2011.01335.x.
    1. Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ: the BMJ economic evaluation working party. BMJ. 1996;313:275–283. doi: 10.1136/bmj.313.7052.275.
    1. Evers S, Goossens M, de Vet H, van Tulder M, Ament A. Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: consensus on health economic criteria. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21:240–245.
    1. Philips Z, Bojke L, Sculpher M, Claxton K, Golder S. Good practice guidelines for decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment: a review and consolidation of quality assessment. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24:355–371. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200624040-00006.
    1. Walker DG, Wilson RF, Sharma R, Bridges J, Niessen L, Bass EB, Frick K. Best Practices for Conducting Economic Evaluations in Health Care: A Systematic Review of Quality Assessment Tools. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2012.
    1. Fukuda H, Imanaka Y. Assessment of transparency of cost estimates in economic evaluations of patient safety programmes. J Eval Clin Pract. 2009;15:451–459. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.01033.x.
    1. Bell CM, Urbach DR, Ray JG, Bayoumi A, Rosen AB, Greenberg D, Neumann PJ. Bias in published cost effectiveness studies: systematic review. BMJ. 2006;332:699–703. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38737.607558.80.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다