DRG 041O Other interventions for problems in eye region, short therapy– splitting into two groups– with and without anesthesia
|Target version:||Expert Group 2017|
|MDC:||MDC02||Owner / responsible:||National organisations|
|Target Grouper:||COMMON||Old forum status:|
The variation coefficient of DRG 041O has acceptable V% value (73-77%) but within the group there are different peaks which show the uneven distribution of cost in the group. To understand and solve the problem, more thorough analysis was undertaken.
The analysis reveals that the main drivers of cost differences are different anesthesia procedures. The main codes used for anesthesia were WX140/WAA140 Parabulbar anesthesia, WX142/WAA142 Sub-tenon anesthesia and WX408/WAA408 Balanced anesthesia.
The cases where any of three anesthesia codes was used were twice as expensive as the cases without anesthesia in DRG041O, i.e. 1 013 EUR vs 1 983 EUR in 2014 and 1 100 EUR versus 2 187 EUR in 2015.
The variation coefficient of split groups would decrease compared to the current V% of DRG 041O:
• 2014 – the V% of DRG 041O was 77%, with anesthesia 56%, without anesthesia 75%.
• 2015 – the respective values were 74%, 64% and 69%.
After trimming 1% of high-end cases the V% improves both years.
Given the remarkable difference of mean cost between two groups of cases within DRG 041O depending on presence of anesthesia we propose to split DRG 041O into two:
a) Other interventions for problems in eye region, with anesthesia, short therapy
b) Other interventions for problems in eye region, without anesthesia, short therapy
Given that the procedure codes WX140 and WX142 do not have anesthesia property they first have to be given one which would refer to eye anesthesia. The same property should be added to code WX408. Thus we suggest to introduce new diagnosis property 02X10 Eye anesthesia and add it to codes WX408, WX140 and WX142.
After the suggested changes the cases currently in DRG 041O will be grouped to separate DRGs depending on whether or not the anesthesia has been performed.
Appendix 2. The technical changes may contain mistakes and have to be used with caution.
Appendix 1. Cost analysis is based on five university hospital data of 2015, grouped with Finnish 2017 grouper, and data of 2014, grouped with Finnish 2016 grouper.
#1 Updated by Mats Fernström over 4 years ago
Mats Fernström, NPK, Sweden 2017-03-04 (NPK ID C678)
We don’t have the anesthesia codes that are mentioned in the suggestion so we are unable to analyze this case. My principal view is that we should be cautious splitting groups into with and without anesthesia. It can become great many groups, perhaps too many. When it comes to reimbursement, you can of course have two types of bills, one with anesthesia and one without.
I know that we have suggested a similar split in case #518 (Clinical examination requiring general anesthesia) but then it is about conservative DRGs where the anesthesia is the only significant procedure.
#2 Updated by Martti Virtanen over 4 years ago
2017-03-09 Martti Virtanen
Sweden does not have codes for parabulbar or sub-tenon anaesthesia. The situation would be coded with other local anaesthesia, which is not usable for this purpose. Balanced anaesthesia is obviously the most usual anaesthesia form and Sweden has hundreds of anaesthsia codes (SA to SG groups).
#5 Updated by Martti Virtanen over 4 years ago
- File Technical changes case #514-517.xlsx added
2017-04-25 Martti Virtanen
The cases #509, #514, #515, #517 and #517 are all about ophtalmology and the changes are related. Therefore the technical changes are now combined for those cases. For the changes the cases are referenced in the tables. The tables include extraneous information for checkup of the process. Those lines are not linked to any case and have '---' in IN/OUT column.
In the process I found a few errors in the common logic structure and I have corrected the at the same time.
In case #517 the proposed removal of 02S03 and 02S04 is a misstake. It is marked with yellow and with 'No' in IN/OUT column.