Proposal for relative units of value (RUV) for use in allergy examinations.

Health resources are limited and consequently real cost generators must be identified to optimize resources. In the present article, we describe the structure of the Homogeneous Functional Groups (HFG) for Diagnostic Techniques in the Allergy Department of the Virgen de la Arrixaca University Hospital in Murcia (Spain) and the healthcare products generated. Based on the 2005 budget, variable costing was used to calculate the costs of the healthcare products generated (skin tests, investigation of drug allergies, etc.) by one of the three HFG (the HFG for complementary investigations). On the basis of these costs, and taking as the unit the cost of one skin prick test, we assigned relative units of value (RUV) to each of the products in our services portfolio. The following conclusions can be drawn: 1) the current system of variable costing provides information, which should be useful to health professionals; 2) the real cost generators in the microcosm of daily clinical practice should be identified to allow resource reallocation; 3) the costing system used enables modifications to be made that allow decision making on optimal use of the budget; 4) to take the decisions required to optimize resources, clinical management and complementary tests should go hand-in-hand.

Direct patient treatment costs in the Allergology Service of a University Hospital.

Health resources are limited and consequently real cost generators must be identified to optimize resources. In the present article, we describe the structure of the Allergy Unit of the University Hospital Virgen de la Arrixaca in Murcia (Spain), the health area in which allergic patients are attended, and the final healthcare products generated. Based on the 2004-2005 budget, variable costing was used to calculate the costs of the healthcare products generated (first visits, subsequent visits, and diverse laboratory tests) by two of the three homogeneous functional groups (HFG), i.e., HFG of the ambulatory service and HFG of complementary tests. The following conclusions can be drawn: 1) the current system of variable costing provides information, which should be useful to health professionals; 2) the real cost generators in the microcosm of daily clinical practice should be identified to allow resource reallocation; 3) the costing system used enables modifications to be made that allow decision making on optimal use of the budget; 4) clinical management and complementary tests should go hand in hand with a view to optimizing resources.