Abstract

Objectives

Although an increasing number of countries are adopting essential health service packages (EHSPs) and undertaking their cost assessment, standardization of the costing methods and their reporting are imperative to instill confidence in the use of findings of EHSPs as evidence for decision making and resource allocation. This review was conducted to synthesize the EHSP costing reports, focusing on the key costing methods and their reporting standards.

Methods

A systematic review of English language literature (peer-reviewed as well as gray) was conducted. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Google Scholar, and websites of key institutions were reviewed (2000-2020). Publication characteristics, costing methods, valuation sources, quality, transparency, and reporting standards were assessed and synthesized.

Results

A total of 29 studies from 19 countries were included. Most studies were government reports (69%) and reported the use of “bottom-up” approach (76%), OneHealth tool (38%), had international funding (79%), and reported both normative and empirical cost estimates (41%). Six studies (21%) scored “excellent” in conduct and reporting. Stand-alone costing of EHSP had higher mean quality score (80). The projected increase in government budget to implement EHSP ranged from 17% to 117%. Limited availability of reliable data on resources, prices, and coverage of interventions were identified as major limitations for costing of EHSPs.

Conclusions

Substantial differences in the costing methods and reporting standards of EHSPs made comparisons across countries difficult. Existing costing guidelines and checklists should be adapted for EHSPs with more specific methodological guidance to allow harmonization of methods and reporting.