[Description of the severely injured in the DRG system: is treatment of the severely injured still affordable?]

[Severe injury type procedures-Influence of the cipher 11 "complications" and the COVID-19 pandemic on a center for maximum care of severe injuries]

INTRODUCTION

Ensuring the best treatment options for injured patients (healing process, Heilverfahren, HV) is the main goal and responsibility of the German statutory accident insurance (DGUV). The injury type catalogue is the tool to guide the HV. The development of the number of cases treated in a center for severe injury type procedures, the effects of the cipher 11 "complications" of the catalogue and the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are presented.

METHODS

A retrospective study of all patients treated in the context of the DGUV from January 2019 to December 2021 was carried out. The number of cases before and during the legal lockdown actions were compared. The case mix index, the mean number of operations, the mean time in the operating room and the hospital stay were analyzed. Additionally, the cases under the cipher 11 were classified according to the specific anatomical regions.

RESULTS

Out of 2007 cases 67% were classified as severe injury type procedures (SAV). Of these cases 51% were categorized to the cipher 11 of the injury type catalogue. Complications were observed particularly in the anatomical regions of the shoulder girdle, elbow, hand, knee, ankle joint and foot. These complex cases are economically not sufficiently represented. During the governmental COVID-19 lockdown actions, the number of patients treated in the context of the DGUV significantly decreased.

CONCLUSION

The injury type catalogue is used effectively in the catchment area of the present trauma center. Most of the cases treated in the present trauma center are severe injury type procedures; however, more than half of these cases are classified as complications. This development might show the need for a structural change or an adjustment of the HV. The current comments on the injury type catalogue offer important definitions and specifications; however, the conciseness of the entire catalogue should be maintained.

[Is polytrauma treatment in deficit in the aG-DRG system?]

BACKGROUND

The interdisciplinary care of severely injured patients is staff and resource intensive. Since the introduction of the G‑DRG system in Germany in 2003, most studies have identified a financial deficit in the care of severely injured patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the effects of the new aG-DRG system introduced in 2020 on cost recovery in the treatment of severely injured patients. For the first time, the costs for organization, certification and documentation as well as the costs for non-seriously injured shock room patients were included.

METHODS

All patients who were treated in the surgical shock room of the emergency department of the Leipzig University Hospital in 2017 were included. For the analysis, the cost model according to Pape et al. was extended by the module organization, documentation and certification and for the first time the costs for overtriaged patients were considered. A cost calculation was performed for the years 2017-2020 as well a comparison with the respective earnings.

RESULTS

A total of 834 patients were treated in the shock room and 258 severely injured patients were divided into 3 groups: ISS 9-15 + ICU (n 72; ∅ ISS 11.9; costs per patient 14,715 €),ISS ≥ 16 (n 186; ∅ ISS 27.7; costs per patient 30,718 €) and DRG polytrauma (n 59; ∅ ISS 32.4; costs per patient 26,102 €).

CONCLUSION

Polytrauma care under the aG-DRG 2020 is in deficit. Overall, in 2020 a deficit of 5858 € per severely injured patient resulted.

[Emergency room and major trauma treatment is a "loss-making business" : A Swiss trauma center experience with current DRG reimbursement]

Hintergrund

Es galt herauszufinden, wie kostendeckend die Versorgung potenziell Schwerverletzter in einem Schweizer Traumazentrum ist, und inwieweit Spitalgewinne bzw. -verluste mit patientenbezogenen Unfall‑, Behandlungs- oder Outcome-Daten korrelieren.

Methodik

Analyse aller 2018 im Schockraum (SR) bzw. mit Verletzungsschwere New Injury Severity Score (NISS) ≥8 notfallmäßig stationär behandelter Patienten eines Schwerverletztenzentrums der Schweiz (uni- und multivariate Analyse; p < 0,05).

Ergebnisse

Für das Studienkollektiv (n = 513; Ø NISS = 18) resultierte gemäß Spitalkostenträgerrechnung ein Defizit von 1,8 Mio. CHF. Bei einem Gesamtdeckungsgrad von 86 % waren 66 % aller Fälle defizitär (71 % der Allgemein- vs. 42 % der Zusatzversicherten; p < 0,001). Im Mittel betrug das Defizit 3493.- pro Patient (allg. Versicherte, Verlust 4545.-, Zusatzversicherte, Gewinn 1318.-; p < 0,001). Auch „in“- und „underlier“ waren in 63 % defizitär. SR-Fälle machten häufiger Verlust als Nicht-SR-Fälle (73 vs. 58 %; p = 0,002) wie auch Traumatologie- vs. Neurochirurgiefälle (72 vs. 55 %; p < 0,001). In der multivariaten Analyse ließen sich 43 % der Varianz erhaltener Erlöse mit den untersuchten Variablen erklären. Hingegen war der ermittelte Deckungsgrad nur zu 11 % (korr. R²) durch die Variablen SR, chirurgisches Fachgebiet, Intensivaufenthalt, Thoraxverletzungsstärke und Spitalletalität zu beschreiben. Case-Mix-Index gemäß aktuellen Diagnosis Related Groups (DRG) und Versicherungsklasse addierten weitere 13 % zu insgesamt 24 % erklärter Varianz.

Diskussion

Die notfallmäßige Versorgung potenziell Schwerverletzter an einem Schweizer Traumazentrum erweist sich nur in einem Drittel der Fälle als zumindest kostendeckend, dies v. a. bei Zusatzversicherten, Patienten mit einem hohen Case-Mix-Index oder einer IPS- bzw. kombinierten Polytrauma- und Schädel-Hirn-Trauma-DRG-Abrechnungsmöglichkeit.

Zusatzmaterial online

Die Online-Version dieses Beitrags (10.1007/s00113-020-00937-w) enthält weitere Tabellen und Abbildungen (s. Verweise „Zusatzmaterial online: Abb.“ bzw. „Zusatzmaterial online: Tab.“ im Text). Beitrag und Zusatzmaterial stehen Ihnen auf www.springermedizin.de zur Verfügung. Bitte geben Sie dort den Beitragstitel in die Suche ein, das Zusatzmaterial finden Sie beim Beitrag unter „Ergänzende Inhalte“.

Gap in funding for specialist hospitals treating patients with traumatic spinal cord injury under an activity-based funding model in New South Wales, Australia

Objective The aim of this study was to estimate the difference between treatment costs in acute care settings and the level of funding public hospitals would receive under the activity-based funding model. Methods Patients aged ≥16 years who had sustained an incident traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) between June 2013 and June 2016 in New South Wales were included in the study. Patients were identified from record-linked health data. Costs were estimated using two approaches: (1) using District Network Return (DNR) data; and (2) based on national weighted activity units (NWAU) assigned to activity-based funding activity. The funding gap in acute care treatment costs for TSCI patients was determined as the difference in cost estimates between the two approaches. Results Over the study period, 534 patients sustained an acute incident TSCI, accounting for 811 acute care hospital separations within index episodes. The total acute care treatment cost was estimated at A$40.5 million and A$29.9 million using the DNR- and NWAU-based methods respectively. The funding gap in total costs was greatest for the specialist spinal cord injury unit (SCIU) colocated with a major trauma service (MTS), at A$4.4 million over the study period. Conclusions The findings of this study suggest a substantial gap in funding for resource-intensive patients with TSCI in specialist hospitals under current DRG-based funding methods. What is known about the topic? DRG-based funding methods underestimate the treatment costs at the hospital level for patients with complex resource-intensive needs. This underestimation of true direct costs can lead to under-resourcing of those hospitals providing specialist services. What does this paper add? This study provides evidence of a difference between true direct costs in acute care settings and the level of funding hospitals would receive if funded according to the National Efficient Price and NWAU for patients with TSCI. The findings provide evidence of a shortfall in the casemix funding to public hospitals under the activity-based funding for resource-intensive care, such as patients with TSCI. Specifically, depending on the classification system, the principal referral hospitals, the SCIU colocated with an MTS and stand-alone SCIU were underfunded, whereas other non-specialist hospitals were overfunded for the acute care treatment of patients with TSCI. What are the implications for practitioners? Although health care financing mechanisms may vary internationally, the results of this study are applicable to other hospital payment systems based on diagnosis-related groups that describe patients of similar clinical characteristics and resource use. Such evidence is believed to be useful in understanding the adequacy of hospital payments and informing payment reform efforts. These findings may have service redesign policy implications and provide evidence for additional loadings for specialist hospitals treating low-volume, resource-intensive patients.

[Costs and proceeds from patients admitted via the emergency room with mild craniocerebral trauma]

The introduction of the diagnosis-related groups (DRG) in 2003 radically changed the billing of the treatment costs. From the very beginning, trauma surgeons questioned whether the introduction of the DRG could have a negative impact on the care of the severely injured. "Trauma centers in need" was the big catchword warning against shortfalls at trauma centers due to the billing via DRG. This situation was confirmed in the first publications after introduction of the DRG, showing a clearly deficient level of care of polytrauma cases. Over the years, adjustments have led to an improvement in the remuneration for polytraumatized patients. In the emergency room, polytrauma is not always the final diagnosis. A considerable proportion of patients are only slightly injured, but must be admitted via the emergency room due to the circumstances of the accident or suspected diagnosis at the scene of the accident to exclude life-threatening injuries. In this study, patients with the billing diagnosis of mild craniocerebral trauma were selected as an example. The proportion of these patients was 22% during the period of observation in 2017. For these patients, the proportional costs during treatment were calculated. It could be shown that 60.36% of the costs during a 2‑day treatment of these patients were incurred in the emergency room. Costs for material and personnel could not be considered. Despite not including these expenses, the costs were never covered for any of these patients. For patients with slight injuries after trauma management in the emergency room, the present adjustments to the DRG system by increasing the basic case value seem to be insufficient. Additional remuneration for these patients seems absolutely justified to further ensure adequate quality of care.

[The cost estimator in the TraumaRegister DGU]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Estimated treatment costs of severely injured patients were often added to registry-based analyses. In the past, the TraumaRegister DGU® used a modular cost estimator for this purpose. A recent research project initiated by the German Trauma Society (DGU) evaluated the reimbursement of severely injured patients in the German DRG system. This project also allowed the generation of an improved update of the registry's cost estimator.

METHODS

Detailed cost data for the acute therapy of severely injured patients were available from 10 hospitals that also participate in the TraumaRegister DGU®. Cost and registry data were matched using hospital code, date of admission, age, sex, and length of stay. A multivariate regression analysis with hospital costs as dependent variable included patients with an injury severity score (ISS) ≥ 9 points who stayed in hospital at least three days. All injuries were coded using the abbreviated injury scale (AIS). A total of 1002 patients treated in 2007 and 2008 were successfully matched. Cost data was collected for each case according to the method of calculation provided by the German DRG Institute (InEK).

RESULTS

The mean age was 44 years and 73 % were males; the mean ISS was 27 points. The following aspects were significantly associated with the overall hospital costs: length of stay on the intensive care unit (ICU) (1152 € per day); length on intubation/ventilation (568 € per day); length of stay on normal ward (531 € per day); number of blood products (packed red blood cells; fresh frozen plasma) transfused until ICU admission (258 € per unit); a serious abdominal injury (AIS ≥3; 2849 €); an instable pelvic fracture with relevant blood loss (AIS 5; 7505 €); and a serious injury of the extremities (AIS 3-4; 2418 €). The estimated overall treatment costs calculated by the above mentioned formula averaged 22,138 € per case. The deviation from the measured real costs (21,546 € per case) was less than 3 %.

CONCLUSION

Using only key data available for all patients in the registry, a valid cost estimator for acute care costs is now available in the TraumaRegister DGU®.

Towards Implementation of OMOP in a German University Hospital Consortium

Background  In 2015, the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research initiated a large data integration and data sharing research initiative to improve the reuse of data from patient care and translational research. The Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) common data model and the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) tools could be used as a core element in this initiative for harmonizing the terminologies used as well as facilitating the federation of research analyses across institutions.

Objective  To realize an OMOP/OHDSI-based pilot implementation within a consortium of eight German university hospitals, evaluate the applicability to support data harmonization and sharing among them, and identify potential enhancement requirements.

Methods  The vocabularies and terminological mapping required for importing the fact data were prepared, and the process for importing the data from the source files was designed. For eight German university hospitals, a virtual machine preconfigured with the OMOP database and the OHDSI tools as well as the jobs to import the data and conduct the analysis was provided. Last, a federated/distributed query to test the approach was executed.

Results  While the mapping of ICD-10 German Modification succeeded with a rate of 98.8% of all terms for diagnoses, the procedures could not be mapped and hence an extension to the OMOP standard terminologies had to be made.

Overall, the data of 3 million inpatients with approximately 26 million conditions, 21 million procedures, and 23 million observations have been imported.

A federated query to identify a cohort of colorectal cancer patients was successfully executed and yielded 16,701 patient cases visualized in a Sunburst plot.

Conclusion  OMOP/OHDSI is a viable open source solution for data integration in a German research consortium. Once the terminology problems can be solved, researchers can build on an active community for further development.

Change of initial and ICU treatment over time in trauma patients. An analysis from the TraumaRegister DGU®

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines have been standardized for pre- and in-hospital trauma management in the last decades. Therefore, it is known that prehospital management has changed significantly. Furthermore, in-hospital course may be altered to reduce complications and length of stay (LOS). However, the development of trauma patient in-hospital management as well as LOS in the intensive care unit (ICU) has not been investigated systematically over a long-term period in Germany. Aim of our study is to examine the changes in in-hospital management and LOS in the ICU in moderately and severely injured patients.

METHODS

Patients documented in the TraumaRegister DGU® (TR-DGU) of the German Trauma Society from 2000 to 2011 and admitted to ICU were included in this study. Demographic data, the pattern of injury, injury severity, duration of mechanical ventilation, LOS in the ICU, hospital LOS, and discharge destination were evaluated. The mean values and the standard deviations are shown. The constant variables were calculated with changes over time analyzed by linear regression analysis, and categorical variables were calculated with the chi-square test.

RESULTS

A total of 18,048 patients were analyzed. The rate of patients being intubated at the time of ICU admission decreased from 86.8 % in 2000 to 60.0 % in 2011 (p < 0.001). The time of mechanical ventilation decreased from 7.5 ± 10.5 to 4.7 ± 8.7 days. The intensive care unit LOS was reduced from 11.7 ± 12.8 to 9.0 ± 11.3 days and the length of hospital stay from 27.9 ± 28.7 to 21.1 ± 20.4 days (both p < 0.01). The ICU LOS remained stable in the subgroup of mechanically ventilated patients (12.7 ± 13.2 day in 2000, 12,6 ± 12.9 in 2011, p = 0.6), whereas it was reduced in non-mechanically ventilated patients (5.5 ± 6.8 days in 2000, 3.6 ± 4.5 days in 2011; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The reduction LOS in the analyzed dataset is mainly explained by the relevantly reduced rate of patients being intubated at the time of ICU admission. Our data demonstrate that trauma patients' in-hospital course is influenced by reduced intubation rate at the time of ICU admission.

[Quality of case allocation of orthopedics and trauma surgery in the 2004 and 2014 versions of the German DRG system. An interim assessment of the development process]

BACKGROUND

Since 2004 the German diagnosis-related groups (DRG) system has been applied nationwide in all German somatic hospitals. The G-DRG system is updated annually in order to increase the quality of case allocation. What developments have occurred since 2004 from the perspective of orthopedics and trauma surgery? This article takes stock of the developments between 2004 and 2014.

METHODS

Analysis of relevant diagnoses, medical procedures and G-DRGs in the versions 2004 and 2014 based on the publications of the German DRG Institute (InEK) and the German Institute of Medical Documentation and Information (DIMDI).

RESULTS

The number of G-DRGs in the whole system increased by 45.1 % between 2004 and 2014. The number of G-DRGs in the major diagnostic category (MDC) 08 that contains the majority of orthopedic and trauma surgery categories increased in the same period by 61.6 %. The reduction of variance of inlier costs in the MDC 08 category, a statistical measure of the performance of the G-DRG system, was below the corresponding value of the total system in 2004 as well in 2014. However, the reduction of variance of inlier costs in MDC 08 (+ 30.0 %) rose more from 2004 to 2014 than the corresponding value of the overall system (+ 21.5 %).

CONCLUSION

Many modifications of the classification systems of diagnoses (ICD-10-GM) and medical procedures (OPS) and the structures of the G-DRG system could significantly improve the quality of case allocation from the perspective of orthopedics and trauma surgery between 2004 and 2014. Th assignment of cases could be differentiated so that complex cases with more utilization of resources were allocated to higher rated G-DRGs and vice versa. However, further improvements of the G-DRG system are necessary. Only correct and complete documentation and coding can provide a high quality of calculation of costs as a basis for a correct case allocation in future G-DRG systems.