scholarly journals Does Korea's current diagnosis-related group-based reimbursement system appropriately classify appendectomy patients?

2016 ◽  
Vol 91 (2) ◽  
pp. 66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kee-Hwan Kim ◽  
Sang Chul Lee ◽  
Sang Kuon Lee ◽  
Byung-Jo Choi ◽  
Wonjun Jeong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnosis Related Group ◽  
Reimbursement System ◽  
Related Group

scholarly journals The New Diagnosis-Related Group Reimbursement System and Laboratory Test Quality in Korea: Analysis of External Quality Assessment Results

Healthcare ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sollip Kim ◽  
Yeo-Min Yun ◽  
Hyeongsu Kim ◽  
Tae-Hyun Um ◽  
Jeonghyun Chang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Laboratory Test ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
External Quality Assessment ◽  
Public Hospitals ◽  
Diagnosis Related Group ◽  
Reimbursement System ◽  
Test Quality ◽  
External Quality ◽  
Related Group ◽  
New Diagnosis

Korea introduced a new diagnosis-related group (NDRG), which is a mixed-bundle reimbursement system. We evaluated the effects of NDRGs on laboratory test quality by analyzing data over three years (2016–2018) from the Korean Association of External Quality Assessment Service (KEQAS). A total of 42 NDRG-participating hospitals (CASE), 84 non-participating similar size-hospitals (CON-1), and 42 tertiary hospitals (CON-2) were included. We assumed the proportion of KEQAS results with a larger than 2 standard deviation index (SDI) to be a bad laboratory quality marker (BLQM). CASE BLQMs were lower than CON-1 BLQMs for more than 2 years in alkaline phosphatase (ALP), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), chloride, glucose, sodium, and total protein, and higher in creatinine. CASE BLQMs were higher than CON-2 BLQMs for more than 2 years in ALP, chloride, creatinine, glucose, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), phosphorus, potassium, sodium, total calcium, total cholesterol, triglyceride, and uric acid. Mean SDIs for general chemistry tests were not significantly different depending on NDRG participation. However, the NDRG is currently a pilot program that compensates the amount of each institution’s reimbursement based on the fee-for-service system, and most participants were public hospitals. Thus, the effects of NDRGs on laboratory test quality should be re-evaluated after the NDRG program has stabilized and more private hospitals are participating.

scholarly journals Diagnosis-related group-based reimbursement is unrealistic for ICUs

Critical Care ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 13 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. P485
Author(s):  
A Mclaughlin ◽  
J Hardt ◽  
J Canavan ◽  
MB Donnelly
Keyword(s):  
Diagnosis Related Group ◽  
Related Group

A review of the complexity adjustment in the Korean Diagnosis-Related Group (KDRG)

2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sujeong Kim ◽  
Chaiyoung Jung ◽  
Junheum Yon ◽  
Hyeonseon Park ◽  
Hunsik Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnosis Related Groups ◽  
Claim Data ◽  
Hospital Charge ◽  
Diagnosis Related Group ◽  
Cost Data ◽  
Hospital Charges ◽  
Average Charge ◽  
Average Hospital ◽  
Adjustment Mechanism ◽  
Related Group

Background: The Korean Diagnosis-Related Groups (KDRG) was revised in 2003, modifying the complexity adjustment mechanism of the Australian Refined Diagnosis-Related Groups (AR-DRGs). In 2014, the Complication and Comorbidity Level (CCL) of the existing AR-DRG system was found to have very little correlation with cost. Objective: Based on the Australian experience, the CCL for KDRG version 3.4 was reviewed. Method: Inpatient claim data for 2011 were used in this study. About 5,731,551 episodes, which had one or no complication and comorbidity (CC) and met the inclusion criteria, were selected. The differences of average hospital charges by the CCL were analysed in each Adjacent Diagnosis-Related Group (ADRG) using analysis of variance followed by Duncan’s test. The patterns of differences were presented with R 2 in three patterns: The CCL reflected the complexity well (VALID); the average charge of CCL 2, 3, 4 was greater than CCL 0 (PARTIALLY VALID); the CCL did not reflect the complexity (NOT VALID). Results: A total of 114 (19.03%), 190 (31.72%) and 295 (49.25%) ADRGs were included in VALID, PARTIALLY VALID and NOT VALID, respectively. The average R 2 for hospital charge of CCL was 4.94%. The average R 2 in VALID, PARTIALLY VALID and NOT VALID was 4.54%, 5.21%, and 4.93%, respectively. Conclusion: The CCL, the first step of complexity adjustment using secondary diagnoses, exhibited low performance. If highly accurate coding data and cost data become available, the performance of secondary diagnosis as a variable to reflect the case complexity should be re-evaluated. Implications: Lack of reviewing the complexity adjustment mechanism of the KDRG since 2003 has resulted in outdated CC lists and levels that no longer reflect the current Korean healthcare system. Reliable cost data (vs. charge) and accurate coding are essential for accuracy of reimbursement.

scholarly journals Severity variations within DRGs:Measurement of hospital effects by use of data on significant secondary diagnoses

1998 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Don Hindle ◽  
Pieter Degeling ◽  
Ono Van Der Wel
Keyword(s):  
Resource Allocation ◽  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Group Classification ◽  
Public Hospitals ◽  
Diagnosis Related Group ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Acute Hospitals ◽  
Related Group

The Diagnosis Related Group classification has provided an excellent basis forenhancing the equity of resource allocation between public acute hospitals. However,it underestimates the higher levels of severity and consequent costliness of referralhospitals.This paper describes a practical way of measuring within-DRG variations in severity,which can be used to increase the precision of casemix-based funding. It involves theregression of length of stay against the numbers of significant diagnoses and procedures,and hence the prediction of additional justified costs. An example is given of itsapplication to data from South Australian public hospitals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document