Objectives: In 2000, the first “Dutch Manual for Costing: Methods and Reference Prices for Economic Evaluations in Healthcare” was published, followed by an updated version in 2004. The purpose of the Manual is to facilitate the implementation and assessment of costing studies in economic evaluations. New developments necessitated the publication of a thoroughly updated version of the Manual in 2010. The present study aims to describe the main changes of the 2010 Manual compared with earlier editions of the Manual.

Methods: New and updated topics of the Manual were identified. The recommendations of the Manual were compared with the health economic guidelines of other countries, eliciting strengths and limitations of alternative methods.

Results: New topics in the Manual concern medical costs in life-years gained, the database of the Diagnosis Treatment Combination (DBC) casemix System, reference prices for the mental healthcare sector and the costs borne by informal care-givers. Updated topics relate to the friction cost method, discounting future effects and options for transferring cost results from international studies to the Dutch situation.

Conclusions: The Action Plan is quite similar to many health economic guidelines in healthcare. However, the recommendations on particular aspects may differ between national guidelines in some respects. Although the Manual may serve as an example to countries intending to develop a manual of this kind, it should always be kept in mind that preferred methods predominantly depend on a country's specific context.

Objectives: This study aimed to produce valid patient-based UK National Health Service (NHS) costs for adults with cystic fibrosis to identify differences between hospital- and home-based treatments for infections.

Methods: A costing study was carried out in adults with cystic fibrosis (CF) in the United Kingdom, who required intravenous antibiotic treatments for respiratory infections, administered either at home or in the hospital. The perspective was that of the NHS hospital trust. Data were collected retrospectively for each patient for 1 year using clinical records. Data were collected for 116 adults with CF between 2000 and 2001, when 42,382 treatment days (454 courses) of intravenous antibiotics were administered; 213 courses with intention-to-treat at home and 241 courses with intention-to-treat in the hospital. The mean length of a course was 15.3 days.

Results: Patients who had >60 percent of courses at home over 1 year had a mean cost of £13,528, compared with £22,609 for patients who had >60 percent of courses in the hospital, and a mean cost of £19,927 for patients who had an equal mix of home and hospital care (p = .0001).

Conclusions: The key cost-generating events in CF respiratory infections are hospital admissions. Future studies assessing costs should concentrate on factors affecting admissions, length of stay, staff input, and alternative methods of home-care provision, rather than marginal effects, such as using different antibiotics.

Objectives: This study proposes the method requirements for a valid costing study in anesthesia to allow differences to be identified between treatments and uses these method requirements to design and conduct a robust costing study.

Methods: A prospective, patient-based costing study was carried out in adult and pediatric day surgery in the United Kingdom. The perspective was that of the National Health Service and the patient. Data were collected for each patient until 7 days after hospital discharge.

Results: Data were collected for 1,063 adults and 322 children undergoing day surgery between October 1999 and January 2001. Statistically significant differences were found only between variable costs, which accounted for 11.4 percent and 9.0 percent of adult and pediatric costs, respectively. There were no differences in length of stay, fixed costs, or semi-fixed costs. Differences were not found in total costs in adults but were found in children. By day 7, postdischarge primary and secondary care costs were not different between groups in either study. No differences were found in costs to patients or parents.

Conclusions: The use of prospective, patient-based cost data enabled the detection of differences in variable costs between difference anesthetic regimens in day surgery. The stochastic nature of the data provided a measure of variability around mean cost estimates. Practice patterns in the study reflected normal practice in the United Kingdom so the costing data have direct clinical relevance. The use of different anesthetic agents only affected variable costs and had no effect on larger cost drivers such as length of stay or staff input.