Case #277

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

Differences of procedure properties between national versions of NordDRG

Added by Anonymous about 5 years ago. Updated about 3 years ago.

Status:AcceptedStart date:2013-10-15
Priority:MinorSpent time:-
Assignee:Martti Virtanen
Category:-
Target version:Expert Group 2014
Initiator:Nordic Casemix Centre Target year:
Case type: Owner / responsible:Nordic Casemix Centre
MDC:GEN Old forum status:
Target Grouper:COMMON, DEN, EST, FIN, ICE, LAT, NOR, SWE

Description

Attached is the complete table of procedures properties differences between the countries.

The columns COM, DEN, EST, FIN, ICE, LAT, NOR and SWE (‘presence value’ for each version) indicate whether the property of the code is in use in the version at issue (value TRUE) or not (value UNTRUE). All differences from the COM version value are reported in the table. They have value TRUE for the variable PROBLEM.

Empty code place (CODE_COM, CODE_DEN, CODE_EST…) indicates that the code exists but the property does not exist in that version. ‘No code’ indicates that the code does not exist in the national version at issue. In these situations the presence value is always the same as for COM to make possible correct assignment of PROBLEM variable.

The column NOTE gives an explanation of the problem at issue. The NOTE of the obvious errors is red. These cases are not separate reported. Others are reported as cases on the NordDRG forum.

This case is represented as general information. Errors will be corrected but have minimal effect on DRG assignment.
Specially the addition of specific national properties to all national versions serves only technical purposes. The only practical consequence is that this makes possible to run comparative analysis on different national versions with data from any of the countries in the NordDRG collaboration.

procdiffprob differences in national codes.xlsx (86.6 KB) Anonymous, 2014-03-04 09:35


Subtasks

Case #278: Properties of additional codes describing use of graftsAcceptedMartti Virtanen

Case #279: Shortening or lengthening of bonesAcceptedMartti Virtanen

Case #280: Use of transplant upper arm or thighAcceptedMartti Virtanen

Case #281: FIN CC model for interventionsAcceptedMartti Virtanen

Case #282: Closed fasciotomyAcceptedMartti Virtanen

Case #283: Peritoneal dialysis at homeAcceptedMartti Virtanen

Case #284: Injection of therapeutic agent into or percutaneous occlu...AcceptedMartti Virtanen

Case #285: Paracentesis and insertion of ventilation tubes AcceptedMartti Virtanen

Case #286: ABSD40 ‘Implantation of spinal injection device’ has 01S5...AcceptedMartti Virtanen

Case #124: Implantation of spinal injection device - Spinal procedure?AcceptedMartti Virtanen

History

#1 Updated by Anonymous about 5 years ago

  • File deleted (procdiffprob differences in national codes.xlsx)

#3 Updated by Anonymous about 5 years ago

  • Parent task set to #11

#4 Updated by Anonymous about 5 years ago

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

Comment Expert Group 2014-03-25

The proposal for this case is only that corrections marked with red in the excel table should be changed and this is a minor change.

The other changes are defined by separate cases listed in attachment to this case.

Proposal accepted.

#5 Updated by Martti Virtanen about 5 years ago

2014-03-26 Martti Virtanen

Technical change

For the 135 rows in table procdiffprob differences in national codes.xlsx that are not linked to any other case (marked with red note column) the properties will be corrected as instructed in the note.

DRG change

Mostly no effect at all. Some errors are corrected and may have minor effects on grouping.

#6 Updated by Anonymous about 4 years ago

  • Status changed from Active to Accepted

Also available in: Atom PDF