Case #647

Delivery of NordDRG 2020PL0 definition tables SWE

Added by Kristiina Kahur 4 months ago. Updated 2 months ago.

Status:ActiveStart date:2019-05-20
Priority:MajorSpent time:-
Assignee:-
Category:-
Target version:-
Initiator:Nordic Casemix Centre Target year:2020
Case type: Owner / responsible:National organisations
MDC: Old forum status:
Target Grouper:SWE

Description

The NordDRG 2020PL0 definition tables are ready for checking by national organisations.

The tables have been produced by using new NDMS. In general, they follow the logic of previously used tables. However, some differences exist, e.g. the names of the single sheets have been changed and some other changes have been made in order to correspond to the NDMS.

We are aware of some technical errors in definition tables, e.g. some diagnosis and procedure features are included in national definition tables although they are not in use in national versions. Those redundant features do not affect the grouping of the cases in national version though. The errors will be fixed asap in NDMS.

We kindly ask you to check the tables and leave any feedback or comments below at corresponding national version ticket at your earliest convenience.

History

#1 Updated by Ralph Dahlgren 4 months ago

2019-05-24 Ralph D
Have gone through some of the sheets in the definitiontables that came from NDMS.
Providing an Excel-file with the things that is not correct in the definitiontables that was provided from NDMS.
As mentioned by Kristiina K some things do not change how the definitiontables would work. But some others will.
In the Excel-file I have made comments, general comments in the first sheet. Then short comments in each cheet that I have gone through.
Have found a few things that Sweden will update to the autumn meeting, minnor details, those are not in the sheets.
Things that is not correct in the sheets from NDMS that do matters as far as grouping of data is concerned you can filter out in the different sheets. You can hopefully see some logic in the differences that is shown that matters when it comes to grouping, I cannot help with that because I do not see a pattern in the differences between the NDMS and SoS definitiontables.

#2 Updated by Ralph Dahlgren 4 months ago

2019-05-27 Ralph D
Have now gone through the rest of the tables that we have compared to the ones made in Sweden. There are three tables. DRGlogic, DRGnames, CSP.
If wanted to see the differences look at the enclosed Excel-file. This second file is called 'Comparison between NCC and SoS definitiontables Pl2020 RD worked with to Forum partly finished, the rest'.
So to see the Everything two files has to be looked at. The sheet DRGnames are in both files.

#3 Updated by Ralph Dahlgren 4 months ago

2019-05-31 Ralph D
Sweden will update all our procedure codes that do not hav OR 1 och OR 2 with the new property OR 0.
During this work we Went through all the procedures.
In the file 'Proc table but only OR 0 for information to NCC.xlsx' that follows this writing are changes that should be done to the NCC procedure table.
The Centre probably already know all of this but all the same, here they are.

#4 Updated by Kristiina Kahur 4 months ago

Nordic Casemix Centre/Kristiina Kahur 3-6-2019

Could you clarify the status of rows 111D1401120 and 111D1401123 according to ORD in file 'Comparison between NCC and SoS definitiontables Pl2020 RD worked with to Forum partly finished, the rest', sheet 'DRGlogic rensad'.
In 2020PL0 tables there are no such a rules for DRG M20O where PROCPR 11S17 determines the grouping. This was not proposed according to technical changes of case #612 (http://documents.norddrg.net/issues/612) either.
If the technical changes of case #612 are incorrect, please update them accordingly.

#5 Updated by Kristiina Kahur 4 months ago

Correction - I meant DRG M29O where PROCPR 11S17 determines the grouping and not M20O. Sorry for typo.

#6 Updated by Ralph Dahlgren 3 months ago

  • Owner / responsible National organisations added

2019-06-04 Ralph
The differences when i comes to the rows in DRGlogic I Think is due to the fact that Marttis technical changes to case #612 left out the open daycare rows. See Maarttis Excel-file 'Technical changes case #612.xlsx (35,584 KB) Martti Virtanen, 2019-02-27 15:21' has no row for Sweedish open daycare.
Compare it to our Swedish textfile 'Suggestion Technical Changes #612 C789 to Forum.xlsx (21,609 KB) Ralph Dahlgren, 2019-02-23 22:55' this is the difference. The Swedish suggested technical changes has four rows for DRG M29O.
The diffences between our rows that I marked in this case are that in one earlier case where Martti explained about not having PDGPROP and MDC at the same time.
I can now see that the ord values in the file 'Comparison between NCC and SoS definitiontables Pl2020 RD worked with to Forum partly finished.xls (20.4 MB) Ralph Dahlgren, 2019-05-24 17:31' for these rows might not be correct due to misshandling by me when going through all the diffences.
But if you look through the original suggested technical changes they are correct but the ord/ID values might be wrong since those are really hard to understand and get correct.
I will make a comment about this in the original case #621.

#7 Updated by Kristiina Kahur 3 months ago

Nordic Casemix Centre/Kristiina Kahur 4-6-2019

Could you specify, where should be the row 499D0001000 (according to the ORD value in table 'Comparison between NCC and SoS definitiontables Pl2020 RD worked with to Forum partly finished, the rest.xls', sheet 'DRGlogic rensad') located in the hierarchy?
Thanks.

#8 Updated by Ralph Dahlgren 2 months ago

2019-07-04 Ralph
I hope that I understood the question correctly.
I enclose a Excellfile that includes the row 499D0001000 but also the row above and the row under. All Three rows with grouping properties just to be as clear as I can.

Also available in: Atom PDF