Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 15718607

Caseview_HUN: easy DRG overview.

Abstract

Several hospital management tools are currently used by the DRG financial system. Each case is classified into a DRG group, so it is necessary to know the distribution of hospital or departmental cases into DRG groups, and to follow the variances of this distribution. The DRG's properties include the income and expenses related to each case. There are differences in the profitability of the cases, depending on their DRG. It is important to know own expenses and the recuperated costs for every case. There are several systems for data collecting and analysis in hospitals, depending on existing hospital information systems and management. We can, however, be sure, that a DRG data collection system works in every department, because it is the basis of assessing income. The tool, which is shown in this article, facilitates an overview of the DRG, presenting the hospital's or other healthcare provider's own data. These services are supported by a platform-independent, accessible Internet application.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

László Daragó. 2004. Caseview_HUN: easy DRG overview.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15718607/

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↗