L Mahlke1, R Lefering, H Siebert, J Windolf, N Roeder, D Franz. 1. Klinik für Unfallchirurgie und Orthopädie, St. Vincenz-Krankenhaus Paderborn, Am Busdorf 2, 33098, Paderborn, Deutschland, unfallchirurgie@vincenz.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Due to the heterogeneity of severely injured patients (multiple trauma) it is difficult to assign them to homogeneic diagnosis-related groups (DRG). In recent years this has led to a systematic underfunding in the German reimbursement system (G-DRG) for cases of multiply injured patients. This project aimed to improve the reimbursement by modifying the case allocation algorithms of multiply injured patients within the G-DRG system. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of standardized G-DRG data according to §21 of the Hospital Reimbursement Act (§ 21 KHEntgG) including case-related cost data from 3,362 critically injured patients from 2007 and 2008 from 10 university hospitals and 7 large municipal hospitals was carried out. For 1,241 cases complementary detailed information was available from the trauma registry of the German Trauma Society to monitor the case allocation of multiply injured patients within the G-DRG system. Analysis of coding and grouping, performance of case allocation and the homogeneity of costs in the G-DRG versions 2008-2012 was carried out. RESULTS: The results showed systematic underfunding of trauma patients in the G-DRG version 2008 but adequate cost covering in the majority of cases with the G-DRG versions 2011 and 2012. Cost coverage was foundfor multiply injured patients from the clinical viewpoint who were identified as multiple trauma by the G-DRG system. Some of the overfunded trauma patients had high intensive care costs. Also there was underfunding for multiple injured patients not identified as such in the G-DRG system. CONCLUSIONS: Specific modifications of the G-DRG allocation structures could increase the appropriateness of reimbursement of multiply injured patients. Data-based analysis is an essential prerequisite for a constructive development of the G-DRG system and a necessary tool for the active participation of medical specialist societies.
BACKGROUND: Due to the heterogeneity of severely injured patients (multiple trauma) it is difficult to assign them to homogeneic diagnosis-related groups (DRG). In recent years this has led to a systematic underfunding in the German reimbursement system (G-DRG) for cases of multiply injured patients. This project aimed to improve the reimbursement by modifying the case allocation algorithms of multiply injured patients within the G-DRG system. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of standardized G-DRG data according to §21 of the Hospital Reimbursement Act (§ 21 KHEntgG) including case-related cost data from 3,362 critically injured patients from 2007 and 2008 from 10 university hospitals and 7 large municipal hospitals was carried out. For 1,241 cases complementary detailed information was available from the trauma registry of the German Trauma Society to monitor the case allocation of multiply injured patients within the G-DRG system. Analysis of coding and grouping, performance of case allocation and the homogeneity of costs in the G-DRG versions 2008-2012 was carried out. RESULTS: The results showed systematic underfunding of traumapatients in the G-DRG version 2008 but adequate cost covering in the majority of cases with the G-DRG versions 2011 and 2012. Cost coverage was foundfor multiply injured patients from the clinical viewpoint who were identified as multiple trauma by the G-DRG system. Some of the overfunded traumapatients had high intensive care costs. Also there was underfunding for multiple injured patients not identified as such in the G-DRG system. CONCLUSIONS: Specific modifications of the G-DRG allocation structures could increase the appropriateness of reimbursement of multiply injured patients. Data-based analysis is an essential prerequisite for a constructive development of the G-DRG system and a necessary tool for the active participation of medical specialist societies.
Authors: T Schwermann; M Grotz; M Blanke; S Ruchholtz; R Lefering; J M Graf V d Schulenburg; C Krettek; H C Pape Journal: Unfallchirurg Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 1.000
Authors: S Flohé; C Buschmann; J Nabring; P Merguet; P Luetkes; R Lefering; D Nast-Kolb; S Ruchholtz Journal: Unfallchirurg Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 1.000
Authors: M Grotz; T Schwermann; R Lefering; S Ruchholtz; J M Graf v d Schulenburg; C Krettek; H C Pape Journal: Unfallchirurg Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 1.000
Authors: D Franz; F Schemmann; D D Selter; T Auhuber; D Gehweiler; N Roeder; H Siebert; L Mahlke Journal: Unfallchirurg Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 1.000
Authors: Andreas B Böhmer; Marcel Poels; Kathrin Kleinbrahm; Rolf Lefering; Thomas Paffrath; Bertil Bouillon; Jerome Michel Defosse; Mark U Gerbershagen; Frank Wappler; Robin Joppich Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2016-04-25 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: C Maier; L Lang; H Storf; P Vormstein; R Bieber; J Bernarding; T Herrmann; C Haverkamp; P Horki; J Laufer; F Berger; G Höning; H W Fritsch; J Schüttler; T Ganslandt; H U Prokosch; M Sedlmayr Journal: Appl Clin Inform Date: 2018-01-24 Impact factor: 2.342
Authors: Nikolas Schopow; Anja Botzon; Kristian Schneider; Carolin Fuchs; Christoph Josten; Nikolaus von Dercks; Johannes Fakler; Georg Osterhoff Journal: Unfallchirurg Date: 2021-06-08 Impact factor: 1.000