OBJECTIVES: To compare the association between the Case Mix Group (CMG) code and length of stay (LOS) with the association between the type of procedure and LOS in patients admitted for gynaecology surgery. METHODS: We examined the records of women admitted for surgery in CMG 579 (major uterine/adnexal procedure, no malignancy) or 577 (major surgery ovary/adnexa with malignancy) between April 1997 and March 1999. Factors thought to influence LOS included age, weight, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, physician, day of the week on which surgery was performed, and procedure type. Procedures were divided into six categories, four for CMG 579 and two for CMG 577. Data were abstracted from the hospital information costing system (T2 system) and by retrospective chart review. Multivariable analysis was performed using linear regression with backwards elimination. RESULTS: There were 606 patients in CMG 579 and 101 patients in CMG 577, and the corresponding median LOS was four days (range 1-19) for CMG 579 and nine days (range 3-30) for CMG 577. Combined analysis of both CMGs 577 and 579 revealed the following factors as highly significant determinants of LOS: procedure, age, physician, and ASA score. Although confounded by procedure type, the CMG did not significantly account for differences in LOS in the model if procedure was considered. Pairwise comparisons of procedure categories were all found to be statistically significant, even when controlled for other important variables. CONCLUSION: The type of procedure better accounts for differences in LOS by describing six statistically distinct procedure groups rather than the traditional two CMGs. It is reasonable therefore to consider changing the current CMG codes for gynaecology to a classification based on the type of procedure.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the association between the Case Mix Group (CMG) code and length of stay (LOS) with the association between the type of procedure and LOS in patients admitted for gynaecology surgery. METHODS: We examined the records of women admitted for surgery in CMG 579 (major uterine/adnexal procedure, no malignancy) or 577 (major surgery ovary/adnexa with malignancy) between April 1997 and March 1999. Factors thought to influence LOS included age, weight, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, physician, day of the week on which surgery was performed, and procedure type. Procedures were divided into six categories, four for CMG 579 and two for CMG 577. Data were abstracted from the hospital information costing system (T2 system) and by retrospective chart review. Multivariable analysis was performed using linear regression with backwards elimination. RESULTS: There were 606 patients in CMG 579 and 101 patients in CMG 577, and the corresponding median LOS was four days (range 1-19) for CMG 579 and nine days (range 3-30) for CMG 577. Combined analysis of both CMGs 577 and 579 revealed the following factors as highly significant determinants of LOS: procedure, age, physician, and ASA score. Although confounded by procedure type, the CMG did not significantly account for differences in LOS in the model if procedure was considered. Pairwise comparisons of procedure categories were all found to be statistically significant, even when controlled for other important variables. CONCLUSION: The type of procedure better accounts for differences in LOS by describing six statistically distinct procedure groups rather than the traditional two CMGs. It is reasonable therefore to consider changing the current CMG codes for gynaecology to a classification based on the type of procedure.
Authors: Peter M Fleischut; Jonathan M Eskreis-Winkler; Licia K Gaber-Baylis; Gregory P Giambrone; Xian Wu; Xuming Sun; Cynthia A Lien; Susan L Faggiani; Richard P Dutton; Stavros G Memtsoudis Journal: Acad Med Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 6.893
Authors: Sunghye Kim; Anthony P Marsh; Lauren Rustowicz; Catherine Roach; Xiaoyan I Leng; Stephen B Kritchevsky; W Jack Rejeski; Leanne Groban Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 7.892
Authors: R Dotzauer; A La Torre; A Thomas; M P Brandt; K Böhm; R Mager; H Borgmann; W Jäger; M Kurosch; T Höfner; C Ruckes; A Haferkamp; I Tsaur Journal: World J Urol Date: 2020-03-28 Impact factor: 4.226