The effect of alternative staff time data collection methods on drug treatment service cost estimates

Gary A. Zarkin, Laura J. Dunlap, Brendan Wedehase and Alexander J. Cowell

Evaluation and Program Planning, 2008, vol. 31, issue 4, 427-435

Abstract: Although a limited number of service cost estimates exist, no study has evaluated how differences in the method used to collect the staff time allocation across treatment services contribute to differences in service cost estimates. Three alternative data collection methods for estimating service-level costs in methadone treatment programs were evaluated: key informants, staff surveys, and staff diaries. We analyzed data from 25 methadone clinics across the United States. Results indicate that for the three primary services offered at methadone clinics--individual counseling, group counseling, and methadone dosing--no statistically significant differences exist in the mean estimates of costs per session across programs. Of the other five services analyzed, we found no statistically significant differences in two of the mean costs per session and a small but statistically significant difference in another service. We found large and statistically significant differences in mean costs for two services, initial patient assessment and initial medical services. Although there is no gold standard available to judge which method is the best to use, we concluded that the key informant method yields more reliable cost estimates compared with the staff methods and is less burdensome to both the treatment programs and to researchers. Our findings suggest that the key informant method is the preferred method for costing substance abuse treatment services.

Keywords: Methadone; treatment; Service-level; costs; SASCAP (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2008
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149-7189(08)00048-7
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:epplan:v:31:y:2008:i:4:p:427-435

Access Statistics for this article

Evaluation and Program Planning is currently edited by Jonathan A. Morell

More articles in Evaluation and Program Planning from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().