Dataset Information

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

ABSTRACT:

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.

SUBMITTER: Jabakhanji SB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8444520 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPhysical inactivity (PIA) is an important risk factor for many chronic conditions and therefore might increase healthcare utilization and costs. This study aimed to analyze the association of PIA using device assessed and self-reported physical activity (PA) data with direct healthcare costs.MethodsCross-sectional data was retrieved from the population based KORA FF4 study (Cooperative Health Research in the Region of Augsburg) that was conducted in southern Germany from 2013 to 2014 (n?=?2279). Self-reported PA was assessed with two questions regarding sports related PA in summer and winter and categorized into "high activity", "moderate activity", "low activity" and "no activity". In a subsample (n?=?477), PA was assessed with accelerometers and participants were categorized into activity quartiles ("very high", "high", "low" and "very low") according to their mean minutes per day spent in light intensity, or in moderate-vigorous PA (MVPA). Self-reported healthcare utilization was used to estimate direct healthcare costs. We regressed direct healthcare costs on PA using a two-part gamma regression, adjusted for age, sex and socio-demographic variables. Additional models, including and excluding potential additional confounders and effect mediators were used to check the robustness of the results.ResultsAnnual direct healthcare costs of individuals who reported no sports PA did not differ from those who reported high sports PA [+€189, 95% CI: -188, 598]. In the subsample with accelerometer data, participants with very low MVPA had significantly higher annual costs than participants with very high MVPA [+€986, 95% CI: 15, 1982].ConclusionDevice assessed but not self-reported PIA was associated with higher direct healthcare costs. The magnitude and significance of the association depended on the choice of covariates in the regression models. Larger studies with device assessed PA and longitudinal design are needed to be able to better quantify the impact of PIA on direct healthcare costs.

Project description:IntroductionCountries are working hard to improve access to healthcare through Universal Healthcare Coverage. To genuinely address the problems of healthcare access, we need to recognize all the dimensions and complexities of healthcare access. Levesque's Conceptual Framework of Access to Health introduced in 2013 provides an interesting and comprehensive perspective through the five dimensions of access and the five abilities of the population to access healthcare. The objectives of this paper are to identify and analyze all empirical studies that applied Levesque's conceptual framework for access to healthcare and to explore the experiences and challenges of researchers who used this framework in developing tools for assessing access.MethodsA scoping review was conducted by searching through four databases, for studies citing Levesque et al. 2013 to select all empirical studies focusing on healthcare access that applied the framework. An initial 1838 documents underwent title screening, followed by abstract screening, and finally full text screening by two independent reviewers. Authors of studies identified from the scoping review were also interviewed.ResultsThere were 31 studies identified on healthcare access using the Levesque framework either a priori, to develop assessment tool/s (11 studies), or a posteriori, to organize and analyze collected data (20 studies). From the tools used, 147 unique questions on healthcare access were collected, 91 of these explored dimensions of access while 56 were about abilities to access. Those that were designed from the patient's perspective were 73%, while 20% were for health providers, and 7% were addressed to both. Interviews from seven out of the 26 authors, showed that while there were some challenges such as instances of categorization difficulty and unequal representation of dimensions and abilities, the overall experience was positive.ConclusionLevesque's framework has been successfully used in research that explored, assessed, and measured access in various healthcare services and settings. The framework allowed researchers to comprehensively assess the complex and dynamic process of access both in the health systems and the population contexts. There is still potential room for improvement of the framework, particularly the incorporation of time-related elements of access.

Project description:IntroductionDetailed and up-to-date data on the epidemiology and healthcare costs of Influenza are fundamental for public health decision-making. We analyzed inpatient data on Influenza-associated hospitalizations (IAH), selected complications and risk factors, and their related direct costs for Germany during ten consecutive years.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cost-of-illness study on patients with laboratory-confirmed IAH (ICD-10-GM code J09/J10 as primary diagnosis) by ICD-10-GM-based remote data query using the Hospital Statistics database of the German Federal Statistical Office. Clinical data and associated direct costs of hospital treatment are presented stratified by demographic and clinical variables.ResultsBetween January 2010 to December 2019, 156,097 persons were hospitalized due to laboratory-confirmed Influenza (J09/J10 primary diagnosis). The annual cumulative incidence was low in 2010, 2012 and 2014 (1.3 to 3.1 hospitalizations per 100,000 persons) and high in 2013 and 2015-2019 (12.6 to 60.3). Overall direct per patient hospitalization costs were mean (SD) 3521 EUR (± 8896) and median (IQR) 1805 EUR (1502; 2694), with the highest mean costs in 2010 (mean 8965 EUR ± 26,538) and the lowest costs in 2012 (mean 2588 EUR ± 6153). Mean costs were highest in 60-69 year olds, and in 50-59, 70-79 and 40-49 year olds; they were lowest in 10-19 year olds. Increased costs were associated with conditions such as diabetes (frequency 15.0%; 3.45-fold increase compared to those without diabetes), adiposity (3.3%; 2.09-fold increase) or immune disorders (5.6%; 1.88-fold increase) and with Influenza-associated complications such as Influenza pneumonia (24.3%; 1.95-fold), bacterial pneumonia (6.3%; 3.86-fold), ARDS (1.2%; 10.90-fold increase) or sepsis (2.3%; 8.30-fold). Estimated overall costs reported for the 10-year period were 549.6 Million euros (95% CI 542.7-556.4 million euros).ConclusionWe found that the economic burden of IAH in Germany is substantial, even when considering solely laboratory-confirmed IAH reported as primary diagnosis. The highest costs were found in the elderly, patients with certain underlying risk factors and patients who required advanced life support treatment, and median and mean costs showed considerable variations between single years. Furthermore, there was a relevant burden of disease in middle-aged adults, who are not covered by the current vaccination recommendations in Germany.

Project description:ObjectivePatient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide self-reported patient assessments of their quality of life, daily functioning, and symptom severity after experiencing an illness and having contact with the health system. Feeding back summarised PROs data, aggregated at the health-service level, to healthcare professionals may inform clinical practice and quality improvement efforts. However, little is known about the best methods for providing these summarised data in a way that is meaningful for this audience. Therefore, the aim of this scoping review was to summarise the emerging approaches to PROs data for 'service-level' feedback to healthcare professionals.SettingHealthcare professionals receiving PROs data feedback at the health-service level.Data sourcesDatabases selected for the search were Embase, Ovid Medline, Scopus, Web of Science and targeted web searching. The main search terms included: 'patient-reported outcome measures', 'patient-reported outcomes', 'patient-centred care', 'value-based care', 'quality improvement' and 'feedback'. Studies included were those that were published in English between January 2009 and June 2019.Primary and secondary outcome measuresData were extracted on the feedback methods of PROs to patients or healthcare providers. A standardised template was used to extract information from included documents and academic publications. Risk of bias was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute Levels of Evidence for Effectiveness.ResultsOverall, 3480 articles were identified after de-duplication. Of these, 19 academic publications and 22 documents from the grey literature were included in the final review. Guiding principles for data display methods and graphical formats were identified. Seven major factors that may influence PRO data interpretation and use by healthcare professionals were also identified.ConclusionWhile a single best format or approach to feedback PROs data to healthcare professionals was not identified, numerous guiding principles emerged to inform the field.