国家卫生服务中诊断相关群体的评估。

Hugh Sanderson, Alison Storey, David Morris, R. Mcnay, Michael P. Robson, Jeremy Loeb
{"title":"国家卫生服务中诊断相关群体的评估。","authors":"Hugh Sanderson, Alison Storey, David Morris, R. Mcnay, Michael P. Robson, Jeremy Loeb","doi":"10.1093/OXFORDJOURNALS.PUBMED.A042481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Evaluation of the use of diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) has revealed a number of technical problems in coding of diagnoses and operative procedures, as well as unresolved issues in the clinical acceptability of existing groupings. An investigation of the statistical homogeneity of DRGs, in terms of duration of patient stay, is described. Consideration of data relating to some 990,000 episodes of in-patient care in three English Regions discloses wide variations in statistical homogeneity, both between DRGs and in relation to individual clinical specialties. The greatest homogeneity is found in ENT surgery and gynaecology; and the least in general medicine and orthopaedic surgery. The need for improved data collection and coding procedures is discussed, together with the advisability of sensitivity in the interpretation of DRGs, as well as the need for a co-ordinated approach to their refinement for application in any wider introduction in the NHS.","PeriodicalId":75726,"journal":{"name":"Community medicine","volume":"13 1","pages":"269-78"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1989-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/OXFORDJOURNALS.PUBMED.A042481","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of diagnosis-related groups in the National Health Service.\",\"authors\":\"Hugh Sanderson, Alison Storey, David Morris, R. Mcnay, Michael P. Robson, Jeremy Loeb\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OXFORDJOURNALS.PUBMED.A042481\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Evaluation of the use of diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) has revealed a number of technical problems in coding of diagnoses and operative procedures, as well as unresolved issues in the clinical acceptability of existing groupings. An investigation of the statistical homogeneity of DRGs, in terms of duration of patient stay, is described. Consideration of data relating to some 990,000 episodes of in-patient care in three English Regions discloses wide variations in statistical homogeneity, both between DRGs and in relation to individual clinical specialties. The greatest homogeneity is found in ENT surgery and gynaecology; and the least in general medicine and orthopaedic surgery. The need for improved data collection and coding procedures is discussed, together with the advisability of sensitivity in the interpretation of DRGs, as well as the need for a co-ordinated approach to their refinement for application in any wider introduction in the NHS.\",\"PeriodicalId\":75726,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Community medicine\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"269-78\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1989-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/OXFORDJOURNALS.PUBMED.A042481\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Community medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDJOURNALS.PUBMED.A042481\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Community medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OXFORDJOURNALS.PUBMED.A042481","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

摘要

对诊断相关分组(DRGs)使用的评估揭示了诊断和手术程序编码中的一些技术问题,以及现有分组的临床可接受性方面尚未解决的问题。一项调查的统计均匀性的DRGs,在病人的逗留时间方面,被描述。对英国三个地区约99万例住院治疗的数据进行分析,发现在drg之间和与个体临床专科相关的统计同质性方面存在很大差异。最大的同质性发现在耳鼻喉外科和妇科;在普通医学和整形外科中最少。讨论了改进数据收集和编码程序的必要性,以及在解释DRGs时敏感性的可取性,以及在NHS更广泛的引入中对其进行改进的协调方法的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of diagnosis-related groups in the National Health Service.
Evaluation of the use of diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) has revealed a number of technical problems in coding of diagnoses and operative procedures, as well as unresolved issues in the clinical acceptability of existing groupings. An investigation of the statistical homogeneity of DRGs, in terms of duration of patient stay, is described. Consideration of data relating to some 990,000 episodes of in-patient care in three English Regions discloses wide variations in statistical homogeneity, both between DRGs and in relation to individual clinical specialties. The greatest homogeneity is found in ENT surgery and gynaecology; and the least in general medicine and orthopaedic surgery. The need for improved data collection and coding procedures is discussed, together with the advisability of sensitivity in the interpretation of DRGs, as well as the need for a co-ordinated approach to their refinement for application in any wider introduction in the NHS.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of diagnosis-related groups in the National Health Service. Economic analysis in the evaluation of health promotion. A report of the investigation and control measures instituted after the isolation of toxin-producing Corynebacterium diphtheriae mitis from a child in Leeds. Communicable disease report. April to June 1989. The PHLS Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre. Women's knowledge and experience of cervical screening: a failure of health education and medical organization.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1