中国卫生经济
中國衛生經濟
중국위생경제
CHINESE HEALTH ECONOMICS
2013年
6期
90-92
,共3页
赵宁%赵琨%郭武栋%申俊龙%齐雪然%徐浩
趙寧%趙琨%郭武棟%申俊龍%齊雪然%徐浩
조저%조곤%곽무동%신준룡%제설연%서호
作业成本法%传统成本法%血液透析%间接成本分摊
作業成本法%傳統成本法%血液透析%間接成本分攤
작업성본법%전통성본법%혈액투석%간접성본분탄
activity-based costing%traditional cost method%hemodialysis%indirect cost allocation
目的：分析作业成本法与传统成本法对血液透析成本的核算是否存在差异。方法：回顾性调查并核算7所三级甲等医院2010年血液透析成本，并进行相关统计学分析。结果：使用两种方法核算的血液透析均次成本差值区间为(0.07，1.05)元，最高成本差异仅占所在核算对象平均间接成本总额的0.39%，且没有统计学显著性差异。结论：两种方法对血液透析成本的核算不存在差异，均可用于血液透析成本的核算。
目的：分析作業成本法與傳統成本法對血液透析成本的覈算是否存在差異。方法：迴顧性調查併覈算7所三級甲等醫院2010年血液透析成本，併進行相關統計學分析。結果：使用兩種方法覈算的血液透析均次成本差值區間為(0.07，1.05)元，最高成本差異僅佔所在覈算對象平均間接成本總額的0.39%，且沒有統計學顯著性差異。結論：兩種方法對血液透析成本的覈算不存在差異，均可用于血液透析成本的覈算。
목적：분석작업성본법여전통성본법대혈액투석성본적핵산시부존재차이。방법：회고성조사병핵산7소삼급갑등의원2010년혈액투석성본，병진행상관통계학분석。결과：사용량충방법핵산적혈액투석균차성본차치구간위(0.07，1.05)원，최고성본차이부점소재핵산대상평균간접성본총액적0.39%，차몰유통계학현저성차이。결론：량충방법대혈액투석성본적핵산불존재차이，균가용우혈액투석성본적핵산。
Objective: Analyze if there is any difference between ABC and the traditional cost method in the accounting of hemodialysis. Methods: Retrospectively investigate and account the hemodialysis cost of 7 hospitals in 2010, and make statistical analysis. Results: The cost difference interval between two methods is (0.07, 1.05) yuan, and the highest cost variance between two methods is only 0.39%of the average of total indirect costs. Meanwhile, there is no statistically significant difference. Conclusion: There is no difference between ABC and the traditional cost method in the accounting of hemodialysis, and both the two methods can be used in the cost accounting of hemodialysis.
