Critical care nursing service costs: Comparison of the top-down versus bottom-up micro-costing approach in Brazil.

AIM: To estimate the nursing service costs using a top-down micro-costing approach and to compare it with a bottom-up micro-costing approach. BACKGROUND: Accurate data of nursing cost can contribute to reliable resource management. METHOD: We employed a retrospective cohort design in an adult intensive care unit in São Paulo. A total of 286 patient records were included. Micro-costing analysis was conducted in two stages: a top-down approach, whereby nursing costs were allocated to patients through apportionment, and a bottom-up approach, considering actual nursing care hours estimated by the Nursing Activities Score (NAS). RESULTS: The total mean cost by the top-down approach was US$1,640.4 ± 1,484.2/patient. The bottom-up approach based on a total mean NAS of 833 ± 776 points (equivalent to 200 ± 86 hr of nursing care) yielded a mean cost of US$1,487.2 ± 1,385.7/patient. In the 268 patients for whom the top-down approach estimated higher costs than the bottom-up approach, the total cost discrepancy was US$4,427.3, while for those costed higher based on NAS, the total discrepancy was US$436.9. The top-down methodology overestimated costs for patients requiring lower intensity of care, while it underestimated costs for patients requiring higher intensity of care (NAS >100). CONCLUSIONS: The top-down approach may yield higher estimated ICU costs compared with a NAS-based bottom-up approach. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: These findings can contribute to an evidence-based approach to budgeting through reliable costing methods based on actual nursing workload, and to efficient resource allocation and cost management.

Urgent need for standardised guidelines for reporting healthcare costs in ICUs - Results of an integrative review of costing methodologies.

OBJECTIVES: Diverse costing methodologies in critical care have produced discrepant results. We aimed to critically review studies addressing critical care patients' costs, to estimate total costs and cost categories and to delineate methodologies used and relevant limitations. METHODS: Integrative review based on key-word searches of electronic databases targeting primary studies that report estimates of patient cost, in the last 21 years. We assessed the level transparency of reporting and the quality of the studies, by the SIGN tool. RESULTS: Overall, 12 research articles were included, of which eight studies mentioned the specific approach used to identify the elements of cost. Most studies employed a micro-costing and one study a macro-costing approach. With regard to approaches to valuation of cost components, only one study identified the bottom-up approach. The total patient cost ranged from US$ 487 to US$ 39,300 and human resources was identified as the cost category mostly driving total costs. CONCLUSIONS: Although valid methodologies to evaluate critical care patients' costs, such as micro-costing, are employed more frequently, a variety of non-standardized methods are still used. There is a pressing need to develop standardised guidelines for reporting of observational studies of cost in healthcare, with particular considerations for critical care.