Diagnosis-Related Group in Colon Surgery: Identifying Areas of Improvement to Drive High-Value Care

2019 ◽  
Vol 85 (3) ◽  
pp. 256-260
Author(s):  
Byron D. Hughes ◽  
Samantha A. Moore ◽  
Hemalkumar B. Mehta ◽  
Yong Shan ◽  
Anthony J. Senagore
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Postoperative Complications ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Hospital Costs ◽  
Care Program ◽  
Colon Surgery ◽  
Diagnosis Related Group ◽  
Migration Rates ◽  
Related Group ◽  
Value Based Care

Diagnosis-related group (DRG) migration is defined as the reassignment of colectomy patients from DRG 331 to 330 based exclusively on postoperative complications. Strategic and comparative application of this metric has the potential to demonstrate baseline and excessive rates of complications related directly to patient care differences across institutions. The aim of this study was to report the variability of DRG migration across United States hospitals and its impact on overall cost and length of stay (LOS). This study investigated the variability of DRG migration rates across United States hospitals polling 5 per cent of the national Medicare data. The study end-points were total cost, LOS, and DRG migration rate. Hospitals were classified into tertiles for low (0.1–16.6%), moderate (16.7–23.0%), and high (23.1–83.3%) DRG migration rates. The study included 5120 patients from 615 hospitals. DRG migration rates for hospitals ranged from 0.1 per cent to 83.3 per cent, with 157 in the low, 183 in the moderate, and 364 in the high tertile. DRG migration resulted in a progressively increased LOS and hospital costs from the lowest to highest tertile. Several diagnoses were identified which are suggestive of failure to integrate evidence-based processes of care across the tertiles. The data confirm a wide variation in DRG migration rates from DRG 331 to 330 based only on postoperative complications. These ranges allow for the potential definition of both best practice, and opportunities for quality improvement with respect to postoperative complications, identification of hospital outliers, and the economics of care as part of a value-based care program.

Abstract 3138: Hospitalization Costs for Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated with Endovascular Embolectomy in the United States

Stroke ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Waleed Brinjikji ◽  
David F Kallmes ◽  
Giuseppe Lanzino ◽  
Alejandro A Rabinstein ◽  
Harry J Cloft
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Hospital Costs ◽  
The United States ◽  
Group Code ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Good Outcome ◽  
Major Complications ◽  
Hospitalization Costs ◽  
Related Group

Background and Purpose- It is important to know the costs for hospitalization for endovascular embolectomy patients so that comparisons can be made to payments to hospitals. Methods- Using the National Inpatient Sample, we evaluated the costs for hospitalization for patients treated with endovascular embolectomy in the United States from 2006-2008. The primary endpoint examined in this study was total hospital costs, and these were correlated with clinical outcome. Hospitalization costs were then compared with Medicare payments for their respective outcomes. MS-DRG 24 was the diagnostic related group code (DRG) for mechanical embolectomy with good outcome and MS-DRG 23 was the DRG code for mechanical embolectomy with major complications. Medicare payments were available at http://www.cms.hhs.gov . Results- A total of 3864 patients received endovascular embolectomy. 1649 patients were <65 years old and 2205 patients were ≥65 years old. Median hospital costs in 2008 dollars were $36,999 (IQR $26,662-$56,405) for patients with good outcome, $50,628 (IQR $33,135-$76,063) for patients with severe disability, and $35,109 (IQR $25,053-$62,621) for patients with mortality. Reimbursement in the year 2008 for DRG 24 (good outcome) was $22075 and reimbursement for DRG 23 (major complications) was $26639. Conclusions- Our study of the NIS shows that hospitalization costs in the United States for ischemic stroke patients treated with endovascular embolectomy are rather high, probably due to the serious nature of their illness. Medicare payments have not been adequate in reimbursing these hospitalizations. Further work is needed to ensure the future reconciliation of costs with payments.

scholarly journals Differences in Hospital Costs among Octogenarians and Nonagenarians Following Primary Total Joint Arthroplasty

Geriatrics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
Christopher Fang ◽  
Andrew Hagar ◽  
Matthew Gordon ◽  
Carl T. Talmo ◽  
David A. Mattingly ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Length Of Stay ◽  
Total Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Hospital Costs ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Joint Arthroplasty ◽  
Nursing Facilities ◽  
Activity Based Costing ◽  
Skilled Nursing ◽  
Value Based Care ◽  
Hospital Expenses

The proportion of patients over the age of 90 years continues to grow, and the anticipated demand for total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in this population is expected to rise concomitantly. As the country shifts to alternative reimbursement models, data regarding hospital expenses is needed for accurate risk-adjusted stratification. The aim of this study was to compare total in-hospital costs following primary TJA in octogenarians and nonagenarians, and to determine the primary drivers of cost. This was a retrospective analysis from a single institution in the U.S. We used time-drive activity-based costing (TDABC) to capture granular total hospital costs for each patient. 889 TJA’s were included in the study, with 841 octogenarians and 48 nonagenarians. Nonagenarians were more likely to undergo total hip arthroplasty (THA) (70.8% vs. 42.4%; p < 0.0001), had higher ASA classification (2.6 vs. 2.4; p = 0.049), and were more often privately insured (35.4% vs. 27.8%; p = 0.0001) as compared to octogenarians. Nonagenarians were more often discharged to skilled nursing facilities (56.2% vs. 37.5%; p = 0.0011), experienced longer operating room (OR) time (142 vs. 133; p = 0.0201) and length of stay (3.7 vs. 3.1; p = 0.0003), and had higher implant and total in-hospital costs (p < 0.0001 and 0.0001). Multivariate linear regression showed implant cost (0.700; p < 0.0001), length of stay (0.546; p < 0.0001), and OR time (0.288; p < 0.0001) to be the strongest associations with overall costs. Primary TJA for nonagenarians was more expensive than octogenarians. Targeting implant costs, length of stay, and OR time can reduce costs for nonagenarians in order to provide cost-effective value-based care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document