Literature DB >> 28083829

Inpatient Complexity in Radiology-a Practical Application of the Case Mix Index Metric.

Thusitha Mabotuwana1, Christopher S Hall2, Sebastian Flacke3, Shiby Thomas4, Christoph Wald3.   

Abstract

With ongoing healthcare payment reforms in the USA, radiology is moving from its current state of a revenue generating department to a new reality of a cost-center. Under bundled payment methods, radiology does not get reimbursed for each and every inpatient procedure, but rather, the hospital gets reimbursed for the entire hospital stay under an applicable diagnosis-related group code. The hospital case mix index (CMI) metric, as defined by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, has a significant impact on how much hospitals get reimbursed for an inpatient stay. Oftentimes, patients with the highest disease acuity are treated in tertiary care radiology departments. Therefore, the average hospital CMI based on the entire inpatient population may not be adequate to determine department-level resource utilization, such as the number of technologists and nurses, as case length and staffing intensity gets quite high for sicker patients. In this study, we determine CMI for the overall radiology department in a tertiary care setting based on inpatients undergoing radiology procedures. Between April and September 2015, CMI for radiology was 1.93. With an average of 2.81, interventional neuroradiology had the highest CMI out of the ten radiology sections. CMI was consistently higher across seven of the radiology sections than the average hospital CMI of 1.81. Our results suggest that inpatients undergoing radiology procedures were on average more complex in this hospital setting during the time period considered. This finding is relevant for accurate calculation of labor analytics and other predictive resource utilization tools.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bundled payments; Case mix index; MS-DRG codes; Radiology informatics; Radiology reimbursements

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28083829      PMCID: PMC5422234          DOI: 10.1007/s10278-017-9944-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Digit Imaging        ISSN: 0897-1889            Impact factor:   4.056


  10 in total

1.  Ensuring the validity of labor productivity benchmarking.

Authors:  Mo Kirtane
Journal:  Healthc Financ Manage       Date:  2012-06

2.  Measuring and managing radiologist productivity, part 2: beyond the clinical numbers.

Authors:  Richard Duszak; Lawrence R Muroff
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 5.532

Review 3.  Measuring and managing radiologist productivity, part 1: clinical metrics and benchmarks.

Authors:  Richard Duszak; Lawrence R Muroff
Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 5.532

4.  Inpatients are sicker than outpatients; finally it's evidence-based.

Authors:  Kenneth Dickstein
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 5.214

5.  Unnecessary imaging for the staging of low-risk prostate cancer is common.

Authors:  Hugh J Lavery; Jonathan S Brajtbord; Adam W Levinson; Fatima Nabizada-Pace; Matthew E Pollard; David B Samadi
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2010-10-08       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Follow these sure-fire tips to sort through data and measure outcomes in your department.

Authors:  Toni Cesta
Journal:  Hosp Case Manag       Date:  2011-05

7.  Emergency physician perceptions of medically unnecessary advanced diagnostic imaging.

Authors:  Hemal K Kanzaria; Jerome R Hoffman; Marc A Probst; John P Caloyeras; Sandra H Berry; Robert H Brook
Journal:  Acad Emerg Med       Date:  2015-03-23       Impact factor: 3.451

8.  Pricing radiology bundled CPT codes accurately.

Authors:  Pam Kassing; Melody W Mulaik; James Rawson
Journal:  Radiol Manage       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr

9.  How Relative Value Units Undervalue the Cognitive Physician Visit: A Focus on Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Authors:  Seymour Katz; Gil Melmed
Journal:  Gastroenterol Hepatol (N Y)       Date:  2016-04

10.  Inpatient vs. elective outpatient cardiac resynchronization therapy device implantation and long-term clinical outcome.

Authors:  Olujimi A Ajijola; Eric A Macklin; Stephanie A Moore; David McCarty; Kara E Bischoff; Edwin Kevin Heist; Michael Picard; Jeremy N Ruskin; George William Dec; Jagmeet P Singh
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2010-09-18       Impact factor: 5.214

  10 in total
  1 in total

1.  Risk of Readmission Among HIV Patients in Public Portuguese Hospitals: Longitudinal Multilevel Population-Based Study.

Authors:  Ahmed N Shaaban; Sara S Dias; Zelia Muggli; Bárbara Peleteiro; Maria Rosario O Martins
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2020-02-21
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.