Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2009 Oct;72(1):98-103.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2008.07.002. Epub 2008 Aug 13.

A microcosting study of diagnostic tests for the detection of coronary artery disease in The Netherlands

S S Tan  1 , M Oppe, S K Zoet-Nugteren, R A Niezen, M J M Kofflard, F J Ten Cate, L Hakkaart-van Roijen
Affiliations
Multicenter Study

A microcosting study of diagnostic tests for the detection of coronary artery disease in The Netherlands

S S Tan et al. Eur J Radiol. 2009 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: The primary aim of the present study was to calculate the actual costs of four diagnostic tests for the detection of coronary artery disease in the Netherlands using a microcosting methodology. As a secondary objective, the cost effectiveness of eight diagnostic strategies was examined, using microcosting and reimbursement fees subsequently as the cost estimate.

Design: A multicenter, retrospective cost analysis from a hospital perspective.

Setting: The study was conducted in three general hospitals in the Netherlands for 2006.

Interventions: Exercise electrocardiography (exECG), stress echocardiography (sECHO), single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and coronary angiography (CA).

Results: The actual costs of exECG, sECHO, SPECT and CA were 33, 216, 614 and 1300 euro respectively. For all diagnostic tests, labour and indirect cost components (overheads and capital) together accounted for over 75% of the total costs. Consumables played a relatively important role in SPECT (14%). Hotel and nutrition were only applicable to SPECT and CA. Diagnostic services were solely performed for CA, but their costs were negligible (2%). Using microcosting estimates, exECG-sECHO-SPECT-CA was the most and CA the least cost effective strategy (397 and 1302 euro per accurately diagnosed patient). Using reimbursement fees, exECG-sECHO-CA was most and SPECT-CA least cost effective (147 and 567 euro per accurately diagnosed patient).

Conclusions: The use of microcosting estimates instead of reimbursement fees led to different conclusions regarding the relative cost effectiveness of alternative strategies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms