Evaluation of reporting in time-driven activity-based costing studies on cardiovascular diseases: a scoping review
Publication: Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research
Abstract
Aim: This scoping review evaluates the application of the time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) methodology in cardiovascular disease (CVD) studies. Materials & methods: The evaluation was conducted using the 32-item TDABC Healthcare Consortium Consensus Statement Checklist. A systematic search was performed in Medline, Embase and Scopus in September 2023, including only full-text, peer-reviewed studies reporting the application of TDABC in CVD research. Results: Twenty studies were included in the review. The positive response rate for individual studies ranged from 31 to 81%. The most frequently addressed checklist item was the clear definition of study objectives, while presenting costs per patient included in the analysis was the least reported item. Although 70% of the studies achieved a positive response rate above 50%, adherence to the TDABC checklist remains inconsistent. Conclusion: There is significant room for improvement in the reporting of TDABC methodology in CVD studies. Providing a more comprehensive and standardized description of the methodology would enhance the utility, reproducibility and accuracy of the information generated, supporting the development of evidence-based health policies and improving accountability in healthcare cost assessments.
Supplementary Material
File (supplementary materials.docx)
- Download
- 46.70 KB
References
Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest
1.
OECD. Health at a Glance 2023: OECD Indicators. OECD (2023).
2.
OECD, The World Bank. Health at a Glance: Latin America and the Caribbean 2023. OECD (2023).
3.
Abernethy A, Abrahams E, Barker A et al. Turning the tide against cancer through sustained medical innovation: the pathway to progress. Clin. Cancer Res. 20(5), 1081–1086 (2014).
4.
Kazi DS, Elkind MSV, Deutsch A et al. Forecasting the economic burden of cardiovascular disease and stroke in the United States through 2050: a Presidential Advisory from the American Heart Association. Circulation 150(4), e89–e101 (2024).
5.
Rao KD, Roberton T, Vecino-Ortiz AI et al. Future health expenditures and its determinants in Latin America and the Caribbean: a multi-country projection study. Lancet Reg. Health Am. 100781 (2024).
6.
Roth GA, Mensah GA, Johnson CO et al. Global burden of cardiovascular diseases and risk factors, 1990–2019. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 76(25), 2982–3021 (2020).
• Describes burden of cardiovascular diseases.
7.
Vollset SE, Ababneh HS, Abate YH et al. Burden of disease scenarios for 204 countries and territories, 2022–2050: a forecasting analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. Lancet 403(10440), 2204–2256 (2024).
8.
Joynt Maddox KE, Elkind MSV, Aparicio HJ et al. Forecasting the burden of cardiovascular disease and stroke in the United States through 2050—prevalence of risk factors and disease: a Presidential Advisory from the American Heart Association. Circulation 150(4), e65–e88 (2024).
9.
Gheorghe A, Griffiths U, Murphy A, Legido-Quigley H, Lamptey P, Perel P. The economic burden of cardiovascular disease and hypertension in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review. BMC Public Health 18(1), 975 (2018).
10.
Bloom DE, Chisholm D, Jané-Llopis E, Prettner K, Stein A, Feigl A. From burden to “Best Buys”: reducing the economic impact of non-communicable diseases. World Health Organization, Switzerland (2011).
11.
Wagstaff A, Flores G, Hsu J et al. Progress on catastrophic health spending in 133 countries: a retrospective observational study. Lancet Global Health 6(2), e169–e179 (2018).
12.
Lievens Y, Borras JM, Grau C. Cost calculation: a necessary step towards widespread adoption of advanced radiotherapy technology. Acta Oncologica 54(9), 1275–1281 (2015).
13.
Da Silva Etges APB, Cruz LN, Notti RK et al. An 8-step framework for implementing time-driven activity-based costing in healthcare studies. Eur. J. Health Econ. 20(8), 1133–1145 (2019).
14.
Kaplan RS. Improving value with TDABC. Healthc. Finanec. Manage. 68(6), 76–83 (2014).
• Describes the importance of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) methodology to value based healthcare.
15.
Etges APBDS, Polanczyk CA, Urman RD. A standardized framework to evaluate the quality of studies using TDABC in healthcare: the TDABC in Healthcare Consortium Consensus Statement. BMC Health Serv. Res. 20(1), 1107 (2020).
•• The TDABC in Healthcare Consortium Consensus Statement was published in this paper.
16.
Keel G, Savage C, Rafiq M, Mazzocato P. Time-driven activity-based costing in healthcare: a systematic review of the literature. Health Policy 121(7), 755–763 (2017).
17.
Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P, Tricco AC, Khalil H. Chapter 11: scoping reviews. In: JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. Aromataris E, Munn Z (Eds). JBI, Australia, 406–451 (2020).
18.
Clarivate. Accelerate your research with EndNote 20. https://endnote.com/product-details/compare-previous-versions
19.
Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst. Rev. 5(1), 210 (2016).
20.
Donovan CJ, Hopkins M, Kimmel BM, Koberna S, Montie CA. How Cleveland Clinic used TDABC to improve value. Healthc. Finance Manage. 68(6), 84–88 (2014).
• First study to report TDABC on cardiovascular disease.
21.
Tabit CE, Coplan MJ, Spencer KT et al. Cardiology consultation in the Emergency Department reduces re-hospitalizations for low-socioeconomic patients with acute decompensated heart failure. Am. J. Med. 130(9), 1112.e17–1112.e31 (2017).
22.
Chong-Yik R, Bennett AL, Milani RV, Morin DP. Cost-saving opportunities with appropriate utilization of cardiac telemetry. Am. J. Cardiol. 122(9), 1570–1573 (2018).
23.
Goldraich LA, Neyeloff JL, da Silva Etges APB et al. Heart transplantation cost composition in Brazil: a patient-level microcosting analysis and comparison with international data. J. Card. Fail. 24(12), 860–863 (2018).
24.
Martin JA, Mayhew CR, Morris AJ, Bader AM, Tsai MH, Urman RD. Using time-driven activity-based costing as a key component of the value platform: a pilot analysis of colonoscopy, aortic valve replacement and carpal tunnel release procedures. J. Clin. Med. Res. 10(4), 314–320 (2018).
25.
Bobade RA, Helmers RA, Jaeger TM, Odell LJ, Haas DA, Kaplan RS. Time-driven activity-based cost analysis for outpatient anticoagulation therapy: direct costs in a primary care setting with optimal performance. J. Med. Econ. 22(5), 471–477 (2019).
26.
Collins CI, Hasan TF, Mooney LH et al. Subarachnoid hemorrhage “Fast Track”: a health economics and health care redesign approach for early selected hospital discharge. Mayo Clin. Proc. Innov. Qual. Outcomes 4(3), 238–248 (2020).
27.
Erhun F, Kaplan RS, Narayanan VG et al. Are cost advantages from a modern Indian hospital transferable to the United States? Am. Heart J. 224, 148–155 (2020).
28.
Erhun F, Mistry B, Platchek T, Milstein A, Narayanan VG, Kaplan RS. Time-driven activity-based costing of multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting across national boundaries to identify improvement opportunities: study protocol. BMJ Open 5(8), e008765 (2015).
29.
Ho DR, Luery SE, Ghosh RM et al. Cardiovascular 3-D printing: value-added assessment using time-driven activity-based costing. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 17(11), 1469–1474 (2020).
30.
Keel G, Muhammad R, Savage C et al. Time-driven activity-based costing for patients with multiple chronic conditions: a mixed-method study to cost care in a multidisciplinary and integrated care delivery centre at a university-affiliated tertiary teaching hospital in Stockholm, Sweden. BMJ Open 10(6), e032573 (2020).
• Study with the second highest positive rate.
31.
DeWyer A, Scheel A, Kamarembo J et al. Establishment of a cardiac telehealth program to support cardiovascular diagnosis and care in a remote, resource-poor setting in Uganda. PLOS ONE 16(8), e0255918 (2021).
32.
da Silva Etges APB, Cruz LN, Schlatter R et al. Time-driven activity-based costing as a strategy to increase efficiency: an analyses of interventional coronary procedures. Int. J. Health Plann. Manage. 37(1), 189–201 (2022).
33.
Masthoff M, Schneider KN, Schindler P et al. Value improvement by assessing IR care via time-driven activity-based costing. J. Vasc. Interv. Radiol. 32(2), 262–269 (2021).
34.
Zimmerman ME, Batlle JC, Biga C et al. The direct costs of coronary CT angiography relative to contrast-enhanced thoracic CT: time-driven activity-based costing. J. Cardiovasc. Comput. Tomogr. 15(6), 477–483 (2021).
35.
Kumar A, Siddharth V, Singh SI, Narang R. Cost analysis of treating cardiovascular diseases in a super-specialty hospital. PLOS ONE 17(1), e0262190 (2022).
36.
Etges A, Marcolino MAZ, Ogliari LA et al. Moving the Brazilian ischaemic stroke pathway to a value-based care: introduction of a risk-adjusted cost estimate model for stroke treatment. Health Policy Plan 37(9), 1098–1106 (2022).
37.
Morrow C, Woodbury M, Simpson AN, Almallouhi E, Simpson KN. Determining the marginal cost differences of a telehealth versus an in-person occupational therapy evaluation session for stroke survivors using time-driven activity-based costing. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 104(4), 547–553 (2023).
38.
Nurok M, Pellegrino V, Pineton de Chambrun M et al. It's not just the prices: time-driven activity-based costing for initiation of veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation at three international sites-a case review. Anesth. Analg. 135(4), 711–718 (2022).
39.
Wei C, Boeck M, Qian PC et al. Cost of cardiac stereotactic body radioablation therapy versus catheter ablation for treatment of ventricular tachycardia. Pacing Clin. Electrophysiol. 45(9), 1124–1131 (2022).
• Study with the highest positive rate.
40.
Rognoni C, Furnari A, Lugli M, Maleti O, Greco A, Tarricone R. Time-driven activity-based costing for capturing the complexity of healthcare processes: the case of deep vein thrombosis and leg ulcers. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 20(10), 5817 (2023).
41.
Porter ME. What is value in health care? N. Engl. J. Med. 363(26), 2477–2481 (2010).
42.
Leusder M, Porte P, Ahaus K, Van Elten H. Cost measurement in value-based healthcare: a systematic review. BMJ Open 12(12), e066568 (2022).
43.
Pathak S, Snyder D, Kroshus T et al. What are the uses and limitations of time-driven activity-based costing in total joint replacement? Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 477(9), 2071–2081 (2019).
44.
Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement. Br. Med. J. 346(mar25 1), f1049–f1049 (2013).
45.
Sanders GD, Neumann PJ, Basu A et al. Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost–effectiveness analyses: second panel on cost–effectiveness in health and medicine. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 316(10), 1093–1103 (2016).
46.
McEvoy NL, Tume LN, Trapani J. What are publication reporting checklists and why are they so important? Nurs. Crit. Care 27(3), 291–293 (2022).
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
© 2025 The authors. This work is licensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Unported License
History
Received: 1 February 2024
Accepted: 15 January 2025
Published online: 26 February 2025
Keywords:
Topics
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Article Usage
Article usage data only available from February 2023. Historical article usage data, showing the number of article downloads, is available upon request.
Citations
How to Cite
Evaluation of reporting in time-driven activity-based costing studies on cardiovascular diseases: a scoping review. (2025) Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research. DOI: 10.57264/cer-2024-0013
Export citation
Select the citation format you wish to export for this article or chapter.