Skip to main content

Table 2 Micro-costing related characteristics of studies

From: Micro-costing in health and medicine: a critical appraisal

Characteristics N (%)
Whether referred to its own methodology as micro-costing
 Yes 97 (49.7%)
 No 98 (50.3%)
Separate reporting of quantity and unit cost data
 Yes 27 (13.8%)
 No 168 (86.2%)
Classification of transparency of cost estimates [8]
 All components of costs were described and data for both quantity and unit cost of resources were reported for each component 27 (13.8%)
 All components of costs were described and data for costs in each component were reported 157 (80.5%)
 All components of costs were described but data for costs in each component were not reported 9 (4.6%)
 Only scope of costing was described but components of costs were not Described 2 (1.0%)
Cost components includeda
 Personnel 186 (95.4%)
 Materials/supplies/consumables 172 (88.2%)
 Overhead 133 (68.2%)
 Equipment/device 118 (60.5%)
 Facility 112 (57.4%)
 Medication 95 (48.7%)
 Transportation 74 (37.9%)
 Laboratory/diagnostic/imaging test 68 (34.9%)
 Productivity loss 37 (19.0%)
 Food 28 (14.4%)
 Furniture 22 (11.3%)
 Child/elderly care 2 (1.0%)
 Other 60 (30.8%)
Method of quantity data collectiona
 Provider/staff interview 71 (36.4%)
 Hospital administrative cost/accounting database 57 (29.2%)
 Time-motion study 42 (21.5%)
 Medical chart/record review 30 (15.4%)
 Patient self-report 25 (12.8%)
 Synthesis of literature 6 (3.1%)
 Clinical guideline 3 (1.5%)
 Other 112 (57.4%)
 Not clear 32 (16.4%)
Method of unit cost data collectiona
 Invoice price 62 (31.8%)
 Hospital administrative cost/accounting database 60 (30.8%)
 National/regional/provincial/hospital/insurer fee schedule 47 (24.1%)
 Hospital/clinic/provider price catalogue 8 (4.1%)
 Human resources/payroll record 7 (3.6%)
 Other 126 (64.6%)
 Not clear 37 (19.0%)
  1. Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding
  2. a A study may fall into more than one of the listed categories