The impact of using different costing methods on the results of an economic evaluation of cardiac care: microcosting vs gross-costing approaches

Fiona Clement, William A. Ghali, Cam Donaldson, Braden J. Manns

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Published guidelines on the conduct of economic evaluations provide little guidance regarding the use and potential bias of the different costing methods. Using microcosting and two gross-costing methods, we (1) compared the cost estimates within and across subjects, and (2) determined the impact on the results of an economic evaluation. Microcosting estimates were obtained from the local health region and gross-costing estimates were obtained from two government bodies (one provincial and one national). Total inpatient costs were described for each method. Using an economic evaluation of sirolimus-eluting stents, we compared the incremental cost–utility ratios that resulted from applying each method.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)377-388
Number of pages12
JournalHealth Economics
Volume18
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2009

Keywords

  • costing methods
  • cardiac care
  • health economics

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The impact of using different costing methods on the results of an economic evaluation of cardiac care: microcosting vs gross-costing approaches'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this