Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 10124352

Profitable and unprofitable DRGs: the implications for access.

Abstract

Given a choice, hospitals would prefer to admit a patient with the potential to contribute to an accounting profit and prefer not to admit a patient with the potential to contribute to an accounting loss. It is suggested that if all hospitals found the same DRGs to be unprofitable, access to inpatient care would be denied those patient types. A set of 509 hospitals was stratified according to bedsize, Medicare load, type of control, teaching status and geographic location. The 10 most and 10 least profitable DRGs were identified for each hospital category and a Spearman's rank order correlation was used to determine the similarity or dissimilarity across hospital category. The results indicate that the more alike hospitals are in terms of bedsize, Medicare load and teaching status, the more alike are the DRGs that are determined to be unprofitable (or profitable). Conversely, the less alike they were on these characteristics, the less alike were the unprofitable (or profitable) DRGs. There were no differences evident when the hospitals were classified according to type of control or geographic location. These results are generally encouraging in terms of potential access but disturbing in terms of possible further financial threat to rural hospitals.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

M J Long, J D Chesney, S T Fleming. 1993. Profitable and unprofitable DRGs: the implications for access.. https://doi.org/10.1177/095148489300600106

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Reliability of diagnoses coding with ICD-10.

OBJECTIVE: Reliability of diagnoses coding is essential for the use of routine data in a national health care system. The present investigation compares reliability of diagnoses coding with ICD-10 between three groups of coding subjects. METHOD: One hundred and eighteen students coded 15 diagnoses lists, 27 medical managers from hospitals 34 discharge letters, and 13 coding specialists 12 discharge letters. Agreement in principal diagnosis was assessed using Cohen's Kappa and the fraction of coincidences over the number of pairs, agreement for the full set of diagnoses with a previously developed measure p(om). RESULTS: Kappa values were fair (managers) or moderate (coders) for terminal codes with 0.27 and 0.42 (agreement 29.2% versus 46.8%), substantial for the chapter level with 0.71 and 0.72 (agreement 78.3% versus 80.8%). p(om) was lower for the full set of diagnoses than for principal diagnoses, for example in case of managers with 0.21 versus 0.29 for terminal codes. Best results were achieved by students coding diagnoses lists. In summary, the results are remarkably lower than in earlier publications. CONCLUSION: The refinement of the ICD-10 accompanied by innumerous coding rules has established a complex environment that leads to significant uncertainties even for experts. Use of coded data for quality management, health care financing, and health care policy requires a remarkable simplification of ICD-10 to receive a valid image of health care reality.

Diagnosis-Related Groups↗