Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 May 5;15(1):28.
doi: 10.1186/s13012-020-00993-1.

A pragmatic method for costing implementation strategies using time-driven activity-based costing

Affiliations

A pragmatic method for costing implementation strategies using time-driven activity-based costing

Zuleyha Cidav et al. Implement Sci. .

Abstract

Background: Implementation strategies increase the adoption of evidence-based practices, but they require resources. Although information about implementation costs is critical for decision-makers with budget constraints, cost information is not typically reported in the literature. This is at least partly due to a need for clearly defined, standardized costing methods that can be integrated into implementation effectiveness evaluation efforts.

Methods: We present a pragmatic approach to systematically estimating detailed, specific resource use and costs of implementation strategies that combine time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC), a business accounting method based on process mapping and known for its practicality, with a leading implementation science framework developed by Proctor and colleagues, which guides specification and reporting of implementation strategies. We illustrate the application of this method using a case study with synthetic data.

Results: This step-by-step method produces a clear map of the implementation process by specifying the names, actions, actors, and temporality of each implementation strategy; determining the frequency and duration of each action associated with individual strategies; and assigning a dollar value to the resources that each action consumes. The method provides transparent and granular cost estimation, allowing a cost comparison of different implementation strategies. The resulting data allow researchers and stakeholders to understand how specific components of an implementation strategy influence its overall cost.

Conclusion: TDABC can serve as a pragmatic method for estimating resource use and costs associated with distinct implementation strategies and their individual components. Our use of the Proctor framework for the process mapping stage of the TDABC provides a way to incorporate cost estimation into implementation evaluation and may reduce the burden associated with economic evaluations in implementation science.

Keywords: Costing; Economic evaluation; Implementation strategies; Time-driven activity-based costing.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Dr. Beidas receives royalties from Oxford University Press and has provided consultation to Merck and the Camden Coalition of Healthcare Providers.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Composition of implementation costs
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Cost composition by implementation strategy
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Action cost by implementation strategy
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Cost composition by implementation phase

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Aarons GA, Wells RS, Zagursky K, Fettes DL, Palinkas LA. Implementing evidence-based practice in community mental health agencies: a multiple stakeholder analysis. Am J Public Health. 2009;99:2087–2095. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2009.161711. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bond GR, Drake RE, McHugo GJ, Peterson AE, Jones AM, Williams J. Long-term sustainability of evidence-based practices in community mental health agencies. Admin Pol Ment Health. 2014;41:228–236. doi: 10.1007/s10488-012-0461-5. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Willmeroth T, Wesselborg B, Kuske S. Implementation outcomes and indicators as a new challenge in health services research: a systematic scoping review. Inquiry. 2019;56:46958019861257. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Proctor E, Silmere H, Raghavan R, et al. Outcomes for implementation research: conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Admin Pol Ment Health. 2011;38:65–76. doi: 10.1007/s10488-010-0319-7. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Roberts SLE, Healey A, Sevdalis N. Use of health economic evaluation in the implementation and improvement science fields-a systematic literature review. Implement Sci. 2019;14:72. doi: 10.1186/s13012-019-0901-7. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms