Literature DB >> 15959758

Comparative costing analysis of intensive care services between Hungary and United Kingdom.

Akos Csomós1, Mária Janecskó, David Edbrooke.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The study presents the findings of the first National Intensive Care Cost Block Analysis in Hungary.
METHODS: There were 13 Intensive Care Units (ICUs) involved in this study: 5 University Hospitals, 6 District County Hospitals and 2 City Hospitals. The annual costs of ICUs were measured by "top-down" approach based on Cost Block Method. Annual expenditure of 3 cost blocks was collected for year 2000: clinical support, consumables and staff costs. On top of the annual costs, we collected general ICU data and Top 10 drugs of each unit. Our data was compared to National Cost Block data of United Kingdom.
RESULTS: There were 9313 patients involved in the study. The median (IQR) ICU occupancy rate was 67% (62-79), mortality was 21% (11-26). The mean cost per bed was 30,990 Euro (SD 12,573) and 144 Euro (SD 63,1) per patient day. Clinical support services were accounted for 9.6% of resources, consumables for 60.6% and staff costs for 29.8%.
CONCLUSIONS: Intensive care costs are very low in Hungary compared to other European countries. The difference is explained by the cheaper staff cost, but the lower number of nurses per ICU bed contributes as well.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15959758     DOI: 10.1007/s00134-005-2692-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Intensive Care Med        ISSN: 0342-4642            Impact factor:   17.440


  4 in total

1.  Variations in expenditure between adult general intensive care units in the UK.

Authors:  D L Edbrooke; S A Ridley; C L Hibbert; M Corcoran
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 6.955

2.  The development of a method for comparative costing of individual intensive care units. The Intensive Care Working Group on Costing.

Authors:  D Edbrooke; C Hibbert; S Ridley; T Long; H Dickie
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 6.955

3.  [Comparative analysis in artificial nutrition].

Authors:  Akos Csomós; Ilona Okrös
Journal:  Orv Hetil       Date:  2003-03-23       Impact factor: 0.540

4.  Charging for intensive care using direct nursing hours as the cost marker.

Authors:  J H Havill; M Caspari; H McConnell; M Alexander; C Montgomery
Journal:  Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 1.669

  4 in total
  4 in total

1.  Comparison of Patient Costs in Internal Medicine and Anaesthesiology Intensive Care Units in a Tertiary University Hospital.

Authors:  İskender Kara; Fatma Yıldırım; Dilek Yumuş Başak; Hamit Küçük; Melda Türkoğlu; Gülbin Aygencel; İsmail Katı; Lale Karabıyık
Journal:  Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim       Date:  2015-02-16

2.  Costs of Providing Intensive Care for Adult Non-survivors in a Caribbean Teaching Hospital.

Authors:  Venkata Gosula; Seetharaman Hariharan
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2020-12-18

3.  A German national prevalence study on the cost of intensive care: an evaluation from 51 intensive care units.

Authors:  Onnen Moerer; Enno Plock; Uchenna Mgbor; Alexandra Schmid; Heinz Schneider; Manfred Bernd Wischnewsky; Hilmar Burchardi
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 9.097

4.  How is intensive care reimbursed? A review of eight European countries.

Authors:  Martin-Immanuel Bittner; Maria Donnelly; Arthur Rh van Zanten; Jakob Steen Andersen; Bertrand Guidet; Jose Javier Trujillano Cabello; Shane Gardiner; Gerard Fitzpatrick; Bob Winter; Michael Joannidis; Axel Schmutz
Journal:  Ann Intensive Care       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 6.925

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.