Case #269

Task #11: Delivery of minor update proposals for NordDRG 2015

The hierarchy problem in MDC08 (DRG 216)

Added by Anonymous over 5 years ago. Updated over 4 years ago.

Status:AcceptedStart date:2014-02-24
Priority:MinorSpent time:-
Assignee:-
Category:-
Target version:Expert Group 2014
Initiator:Norway Target year:2015
Case type: Owner / responsible:Nordic Casemix Centre
MDC:MDC08 Old forum status:
Target Grouper:COMMON, DEN, EST, FIN, ICE, LAT, NOR, SWE

Description

National ID: HD-0076
Initiated: 2014-02-21
Initiator: Stavanger University hospital

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Problem

Cases with both biopsy codes (TNB00, TNC00, TNF00, TNH00, NAA30, NAA32) and codes for surgical procedures grouping to several other DRG’s in MDC 08 are grouped to DRG 216 “Biopsies of musculoskeletal system & connective tissue”. This is due to hierarchy where DRG 216 lies before DRG 210, DRG 211, DRG 212, DRG 213, DRG 214 and DRG 215.
The suggestion from the actual hospital describes a problem especially with respect to DRG 210A and 210N.

Analysis

Norwegian directorate of health – 2014-02-21

The current Norwegian cost weights for DRG 216 and other DRG’s in MDC 08 in 2014 indicate that DRG 216 is less resource intensive than DRG 210A or DRG 210N, but the difference seems to be relatively small.

Suggestion

Norwegian directorate of health – 2014-02-21

We suggest that DRG 216 is moved downwards in the hierarchy and placed below DRG 210A and 210N.

2014-02_Norway_update_proposal_3.jpg (19.7 KB) Anonymous, 2014-02-27 10:52

History

#1 Updated by Anonymous over 5 years ago

  • Parent task set to #11

#2 Updated by Martti Virtanen over 5 years ago

  • Description updated (diff)

2014-03-17 Martti Virtanen
Intuitively this sound reasonable and at least the Finnish DRG weights support the reasoning.
Correct location could be after DRG 212.

#3 Updated by Anonymous about 5 years ago

  • Target Grouper COMMON, DEN, EST, FIN, ICE, LAT, NOR, SWE added

Comment Expert Group 2014-03-25

Proposal accepted. DRG 216 is moved down as proposed by Norway.

#4 Updated by Anonymous about 5 years ago

Beata Tana wrote:

Comment Expert Group 2014-03-25

Proposal accepted. DRG 216 is moved down as proposed by Norway.

#5 Updated by Martti Virtanen about 5 years ago

2014-03-27 Martti Virtanen

Technical change

The rules for DRG 216 (currently ORD 408D04110 and 408D04111) shall be moved below the rules for DRG 211N (currently 408D05320).

DRG change

Cases with interventions with PROCPRO 08S04 and many other interventions are assigned to DRG’s 210-215 instead of DRG 216.

#6 Updated by Anonymous over 4 years ago

  • Status changed from Active to Accepted

Also available in: Atom PDF