IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v87y2008i1p82-91.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing diagnosis-related group systems to identify design improvements

Author

Listed:
  • Reid, Beth
  • Sutch, Stephen

Abstract

The objective of this research was to compare the casemix systems used in the United Kingdom (UK), Australia and the United States of America (USA) to identify possible improvements in the design of the UK Healthcare Resource Groups. The data consisted of over 12 million inpatient and day case discharge records from 574 National Health Service acute hospitals in England for 2001-2002. These data were grouped into four casemix systems, namely Versions 3.1 and 3.5 of Healthcare Resource Groups, the United States-based All Patient Diagnosis Related Groups, and the Australian Refined Diagnosis Related Groups. The statistical performance of the groups was measured using the reduction in variance (RIV) statistic. The Australian Refined Diagnosis Related Groups produced the best RIV overall but this grouper had the advantage of more groups than the others. The comparison of the performance of the chapters within each grouper showed that each had some chapters with a better RIV than the other groupers. Comparing the performance of these groupers was successful in identifying changes to the Healthcare Resource Groups that improved its performance. Further revision of the Healthcare Resource Groups should be focused on the chapters with the best potential for improved performance.

Suggested Citation

  • Reid, Beth & Sutch, Stephen, 2008. "Comparing diagnosis-related group systems to identify design improvements," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 82-91, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:87:y:2008:i:1:p:82-91
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168-8510(08)00002-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andrew Street & Conrad Kobel & Thomas Renaud & Josselin Thuilliez & ON BEHALF OF THE EURODRG GROUP, 2012. "How Well Do Diagnosis‐Related Groups Explain Variations In Costs Or Length Of Stay Among Patients And Across Hospitals? Methods For Analysing Routine Patient Data," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(S2), pages 6-18, August.
    2. Weiyan Jian & Ming Lu & Wei Han & Mu Hu, 2016. "Introducing diagnosis-related groups: is the information system ready?," International Journal of Health Planning and Management, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 58-68, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:87:y:2008:i:1:p:82-91. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.