IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v23y2022i9d10.1007_s10198-022-01444-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are costs derived from diagnosis-related groups suitable for use in economic evaluations? A comparison across nine European countries in the European Healthcare and Social Cost Database

Author

Listed:
  • Zuzana Špacírová

    (Andalusian School of Public Health/Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública (EASP)
    CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP)/CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP)
    Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria Ibs)

  • David Epstein

    (University of Granada)

  • Jaime Espín

    (Andalusian School of Public Health/Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública (EASP)
    CIBER en Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP)/CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP)
    Instituto de Investigación Biosanitaria Ibs)

Abstract

Background Economic evaluation of health technologies requires healthcare resources, procedures and services to be valued at their opportunity cost. In practice, many economic evaluation studies use official databases of hospital Diagnosis-Related Groups (DRGs) as inputs where unit costs are required. This study describes the available data on costs of hospital DRG from official, publicly available sources in nine European countries (England, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden), critically examines and compares the methodologies used to construct these databases and comments on the appropriateness of such unit cost data for economic evaluation. Methods A standardized semi-structured questionnaire was developed in order to obtain both official publicly available sources of inpatient DRG databases and documents explaining the costing methodology used in calculation of unit costs available in those databases. Results England stands out as a benchmark in terms of good practice. Other countries face more challenges in one or more items, whether in documenting and auditing processes, guaranteeing methodological rigour, including all relevant economic items such as depreciation of buildings and equipment and capital costs, conducting the process annually and completely, publishing the costs as well as tariffs and recognising sampling uncertainty or variation. Conclusion Analysts should evaluate carefully whether DRG costs or tariffs published in each country are appropriate for use in economic evaluation.

Suggested Citation

  • Zuzana Špacírová & David Epstein & Jaime Espín, 2022. "Are costs derived from diagnosis-related groups suitable for use in economic evaluations? A comparison across nine European countries in the European Healthcare and Social Cost Database," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(9), pages 1563-1575, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:23:y:2022:i:9:d:10.1007_s10198-022-01444-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-022-01444-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-022-01444-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-022-01444-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M. Pirson & L. Schenker & D. Martins & Duong Dung & J. Chalé & P. Leclercq, 2013. "What can we learn from international comparisons of costs by DRG?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 14(1), pages 67-73, February.
    2. Zuzana Špacírová & David Epstein & Leticia García-Mochón & Joan Rovira & Antonio Olry de Labry Lima & Jaime Espín, 2020. "A general framework for classifying costing methods for economic evaluation of health care," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(4), pages 529-542, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chantelle Murley & Petter Tinghög & Fitsum Sebsibe Teni & Alejandra Machado & Kristina Alexanderson & Jan Hillert & Korinna Karampampa & Emilie Friberg, 2023. "Excess costs of multiple sclerosis: a register-based study in Sweden," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(8), pages 1357-1371, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brahim Bouyahyaoui & Naji Saida & Youssef Hafidi, 2022. "Costs associated with using pharmaceuticals for breast cancer treatment at the Hassan II University Hospital in Fez, Morocco : an ABC method trial [Coût de la consommation des produits pharmaceutiq," Post-Print hal-03993420, HAL.
    2. Patricia Ex & Cornelia Henschke, 2019. "Changing payment instruments and the utilisation of new medical technologies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(7), pages 1029-1039, September.
    3. Candio, Paolo & Meads, David & Hill, Andrew J. & Bojke, Laura, 2021. "Taking a local government perspective for economic evaluation of a population-level programme to promote exercise," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(5), pages 651-657.
    4. Leticia García-Mochón & Zuzana Špacírová & Jaime Espín, 2022. "Costing methodologies in European economic evaluation guidelines: commonalities and divergences," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(6), pages 979-991, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:23:y:2022:i:9:d:10.1007_s10198-022-01444-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.