EQUIVALENCE OF TWO HEALTHCARE COSTING METHODS: BOTTOM-UP AND TOP-DOWN

被引:171
作者
Chapko, Michael K. [1 ,2 ]
Liu, Chuan-Fen [1 ,2 ]
Perkins, Mark [1 ]
Li, Yu-Fang [1 ,3 ]
Fortney, John C. [4 ,5 ]
Maciejewski, Matthew L. [6 ,7 ]
机构
[1] VA Puget Sound Hlth Care Syst, Hlth Serv Res & Dev, Seattle, WA 98108 USA
[2] Univ Washington, Dept Hlth Serv, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[3] Univ Washington, Sch Nursing, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
[4] Cent Arkansas Vet Healthcare Syst, Hlth Serv Res & Dev, Ctr Mental Hlth & Outcomes Res, N Little Rock, AR USA
[5] Univ Arkansas Med Sci, Dept Psychiat, Div Hlth Serv Res, Coll Med, Little Rock, AR 72205 USA
[6] Durham VA Med Ctr, Ctr Hlth Serv Res Primary Care, Durham, NC USA
[7] Univ N Carolina, Sch Pharm, Div Pharmaceut Outcomes & Policy, Chapel Hill, NC USA
关键词
economics; cost; measurement; activity-based costing; relative value units; DECISION-SUPPORT-SYSTEM; AVERAGE COST; VA; EXPENDITURES; AGREEMENT;
D O I
10.1002/hec.1422
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
This paper compares two quite different approaches to estimating costs: a 'bottom-up' approach. represented by the US Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) Decision Support System that uses local costs of specific inputs; and a 'top-down' approach, represented by the costing system created by the VA Health Economics Resource Center. which assigns the VA national healthcare budget to specific products using various weighting systems. Total annual costs per patient plus the cost for specific services (e.g. clinic visit, radiograph, laboratory, inpatient admission) were compared using scatterplots, correlations. mean difference, and standard deviation of individual differences. Analysis are based upon 2001 costs for 14915 patients at 72 facilities. Correlations ranged from 0.24 for the cost of outpatient encounters to 0.77 for the cost of inpatient admissions. and 0.85 for total annual cost. The mean difference between costing methods was $707 ($4168 versus $3461) for total annual cost. The standard deviation of the individual differences was $5934. Overall, the agreement between the two costing systems varied by the specific cost being measured and increased with aggregation. Administrators and researchers conducting cost analyses need to carefully consider the purpose, methods, characteristics, strengths. and weaknesses when selecting a method for assessing cost. Copyright (C) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:1188 / 1201
页数:14
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]  
Baker J J, 1995, J Health Care Finance, V22, P57
[2]   Use of the Decision Support System for VA cost-effectiveness research [J].
Barnett, PG ;
Rodgers, JH .
MEDICAL CARE, 1999, 37 (04) :AS63-AS70
[3]  
Berlin Mark F, 2004, J Med Pract Manage, V19, P219
[4]   Measuring agreement in method comparison studies [J].
Bland, JM ;
Altman, DG .
STATISTICAL METHODS IN MEDICAL RESEARCH, 1999, 8 (02) :135-160
[5]   STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) :307-310
[6]   CONVERGENT AND DISCRIMINANT VALIDATION BY THE MULTITRAIT-MULTIMETHOD MATRIX [J].
CAMPBELL, DT ;
FISKE, DW .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 1959, 56 (02) :81-105
[7]   Drivers of cost system development in hospitals: results of a survey [J].
Cardinaels, E ;
Roodhooft, F ;
van Herck, G .
HEALTH POLICY, 2004, 69 (02) :239-252
[8]  
Carey K., 2000, Financial Accountability and Management, V16, P289
[9]  
Chan Y C, 1993, Health Care Manage Rev, V18, P71
[10]  
Emmett Dennis, 2005, J Hosp Mark Public Relations, V15, P79