A Cost Analysis of Colonoscopy using Microcosting and Time-and-motion Techniques
- 157 Downloads
The cost of an individual colonoscopy is an important determinant of the overall cost and cost-effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening. Published cost estimates vary widely and typically report institutional costs derived from gross-costing methods.
Perform a cost analysis of colonoscopy using micro-costing and time-and-motion techniques to determine the total societal cost of colonoscopy, which includes direct health care costs as well as direct non-health care costs and costs related to patients’ time. The design is prospective cohort. The participants were 276 contacted, eligible patients who underwent colonoscopy between July 2001 and June 2002, at either a Veterans’ Affairs Medical Center or a University Hospital in the Southeastern United States.
The median direct health care cost for colonoscopy was $379 (25%, 75%; $343, $433). The median direct non-health care and patient time costs were $226 (25%, 75%; $187, $323) and $274 (25%, 75%; $186, $368), respectively. The median total societal cost of colonoscopy was $923 (25%, 75%; $805, $1047). The median direct health care, direct non-health care, patient time costs, and total costs at the VA were $391, $288, $274, and $958, respectively; analogous costs at the University Hospital were $376, $189, $368, and $905, respectively.
Microcosting techniques and time-and-motion studies can produce accurate, detailed cost estimates for complex medical interventions. Cost estimates that inform health policy decisions or cost-effectiveness analyses should use total costs from the societal perspective. Societal cost estimates, which include patient and caregiver time costs, may affect colonoscopy screening rates.
KEY WORDScost analysis colonoscopy colorectal cancer microcosting time-and-motion
The study was primarily funded through a Discovery grant from the Vanderbilt Ingram Cancer Center. Drs. Ness and Dittus are supported in part by the Tennessee Valley Healthcare System Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center and the Vanderbilt Center for Health Services Research. We greatly appreciate the assistance provided by Dr. Ted Speroff, Ms. Amber Norton, and Ms. Patricia Harrison in the completion of this manuscript. Portions of this manuscript were presented at the annual meeting of the Society of General Internal Medicine (May 2003) in Vancouver, Canada.
Conflicts of Interest
- 14.Luce BR, Manning WG, Siegel JE, Lipscomb J. Estimating costs in cost-effectiveness analysis. In: Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russell LB, Weinstein MC, eds. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996:176–213.Google Scholar
- 18.US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. National compensation survey: occupational wages in the east south central census division, 2000. Bulletin 2547-6. November, 2001. Available at: http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/sp/ncbl0394.pdf. Accessed August 23, 2006.
- 19.Internal Revenue Service, Form 2106. 2001. Available at: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/f2106--2001.pdf#search=%22form%202106%202001%22. Accessed August 23, 2006.
- 20.Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Changes to the hospital outpatient prospective payment system for calendar year 2002. Regulation No. CMS-1159-F2. Available at: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/HospitalOutpatientPPS/HORD/itemdetail.asp?filterType=dual,%20keyword&filterValue=2002&filterByDID=0&sortByDID=3&sortOrder=descending&itemID=CMS048533&intNumPerPage=10. Accessed March 28, 2007.