IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v22y2024i6d10.1007_s40258-024-00905-0.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Development of a New Approach for the Harmonized Multi-Sectoral and Multi-Country Cost Valuation of Services: The PECUNIA Reference Unit Cost (RUC) Templates

Author

Listed:
  • Susanne Mayer

    (Medical University of Vienna)

  • Michael Berger

    (Medical University of Vienna)

  • Nataša Perić

    (Medical University of Vienna)

  • Claudia Fischer

    (Medical University of Vienna)

  • Alexander Konnopka

    (University Medical Center Hamburg)

  • Valentin Brodszky

    (Corvinus University of Budapest)

  • Silvia M. A. A. Evers

    (Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University)

  • Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen

    (Erasmus University Rotterdam)

  • Mencia Ruiz Guitérrez Colosia

    (Universidad Loyola Andalucía)

  • Luis Salvador-Carulla

    (Health Research Institute, University of Canberra)

  • A-La Park

    (London School of Economics and Political Science)

  • Joanna Thorn

    (University of Bristol)

  • Lidia García-Pérez

    (Servicio Canario de la Salud (SESCS))

  • Judit Simon

    (Medical University of Vienna
    University of Oxford)

Abstract

Background Increasing healthcare costs require evidence-based resource use allocation for which assessing costs rigorously and comparably is crucial. Harmonized cross-country costing methods for evaluating interventions from a societal perspective are lacking. This study presents the development process and content of the service costing templates developed as part of the European project PECUNIA. Methods The six developmental steps towards technological readiness of the templates included (1) a common conceptual costing framework and review of methodological costing issues, (2) harmonization strategy formulation, (3) proof-of-concept with expert feedback, (4) piloting, (5) validation, and (6) demonstration in six European countries. Results The PECUNIA Reference Unit Cost (RUC) Templates for service costing are three new self-completion tools to be used with secondary or primary data for top-down micro-costing or top-down gross-costing approaches. Complementary data collection and unit cost aggregation/weighting templates are available. The applications leading to the final versions including (4) piloting through calculation of 15-unit costs, (5) validation within a Health Technology Assessment framework, and (6) RUC calculations mostly based on secondary data demonstrated the templates’ general feasibility, with feedback for improved usability incorporated and a supplementary user guide developed. Conclusion The validated PECUNIA RUC Templates for multi-sectoral and multi-country service costing allow for harmonized RUC development while incorporating flexibility and transparency in the choice of costing approaches, data sources and magnitude of remaining heterogeneity. The templates are expected to significantly improve the quality, comparability and availability of unit costs for economic evaluations, and promote the transferability of service cost information across Europe.

Suggested Citation

  • Susanne Mayer & Michael Berger & Nataša Perić & Claudia Fischer & Alexander Konnopka & Valentin Brodszky & Silvia M. A. A. Evers & Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen & Mencia Ruiz Guitérrez Colosia & Luis Salv, 2024. "The Development of a New Approach for the Harmonized Multi-Sectoral and Multi-Country Cost Valuation of Services: The PECUNIA Reference Unit Cost (RUC) Templates," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 783-796, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:22:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00905-0
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-024-00905-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-024-00905-0
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-024-00905-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:22:y:2024:i:6:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00905-0. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.