Ann Surg Treat Res.  2016 Aug;91(2):66-73. 10.4174/astr.2016.91.2.66.

Does Korea's current diagnosis-related group-based reimbursement system appropriately classify appendectomy patients?

• Kim KH
• Lee SC
• Lee SK
• Choi BJ
• Jeong W
• Kim SJ

• KMID: 2344497
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2016.91.2.66

Abstract

PURPOSE
As several years have passed since the implementation of the Korean diagnosis-related group (DRG) payment system for appendicitis, its early outcomes should be assessed to determine if further improvements are warranted.
METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed clinical data from Korean patients who underwent appendectomy, dividing the sample into 2 groups of those who received services before and after implementation of the DRG system. Based on the DRG code classification, patient data were collected including the amount of DRG reimbursement and the total in-patient costs. We subsequently performed univariate and multivariate analyses to identify independent factors contributing to higher total in-patient cost.
RESULTS
Although implementation of the DRG system for appendicitis significantly reduced postoperative length of stay (2.8 ± 1.0 days vs. 3.4 ± 1.9 days, P < 0.001), it did not reduce total in-hospital cost. The independent factors related to total inhospital cost included patient age of 70 years or more (odds ratio [OR], 3.214; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.769-5.840; P < 0.001) and operation time longer than 100 minutes (OR, 3.690; 95% CI, 2.007-6.599, P < 0.001). In addition, older patients (≥70 years) showed a nearly 10 times greater relative risk for having a comorbid condition (95% CI, 5.141-20.214; P < 0.001) and a 3.255 times greater relative risk for having higher total in-hospital cost (95% CI, 1.731-6.119, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
It appears that older patients (>70 years) have greater comorbidities, which contribute to higher inpatient costs. Thus, our study suggests that patient age be considered as a DRG classification variable.

Keyword

Appendectomy; Diagnosis-related groups; Age groups; Length of stay; Hospital costs

MeSH Terms

Appendectomy*
Appendicitis
Classification
Comorbidity
Diagnosis-Related Groups
Hospital Costs
Humans
Inpatients
Length of Stay
Multivariate Analysis
Retrospective Studies

Reference

1. Cheng SH, Chen CC, Tsai SL. The impacts of DRG-based payments on health care provider behaviors under a universal coverage system: a population-based study. Health Policy. 2012; 107:202–208.

2. Mason A, Or Z, Renaud T, Street A, Thuilliez J, Ward P, et al. How well do diagnosis-related groups for appendectomy explain variations in resource use? An analysis of patient-level data from 10 European countries. Health Econ. 2012; 21:Suppl 2. 30–40.

3. Quentin W, Scheller-Kreinsen D, Geissler A, Busse R. EuroDRG group. Appendectomy and diagnosis-related groups (DRGs): patient classification and hospital reimbursement in 11 European countries. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2012; 397:317–326.

Geissler A., Scheller-Kreinsen D., Quentin W. EuroDRG group. Do diagnosis-related groups appropriately explain variations in costs and length of stay of hip replacement? A comparative assessment of DRG systems across 10 European countries. Health Econ. 2012. 21:Suppl 2. 103–115.

5. Ellis RP. Creaming, skimping and dumping: provider competition on the intensive and extensive margins. J Health Econ. 1998; 17:537–555.

6. Martinussen PE, Hagen TP. Reimbursement systems, organisational forms and patient selection: evidence from day surgery in Norway. Health Econ Policy Law. 2009; 4(Pt 2):139–158.

7. Kim H, Jung IM, Yun KW, Heo SC, Ahn YJ, Hwang KT, et al. Early outcome of the Korean Diagnosis-Related Groups payment system for appendectomy. Ann Surg Treat Res. 2015; 88:126–132.

8. Fukami Y, Hasegawa H, Sakamoto E, Komatsu S, Hiromatsu T. Value of laparoscopic appendectomy in perforated appendicitis. World J Surg. 2007; 31:93–97.

9. Masoomi H, Mills S, Dolich MO, Ketana N, Carmichael JC, Nguyen NT, et al. Comparison of outcomes of laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in adults: data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS), 2006-2008. J Gastrointest Surg. 2011; 15:2226–2231.

10. Sleem R, Fisher S, Gestring M, Cheng J, Sangosanya A, Stassen N, et al. Perforated appendicitis: is early laparoscopic appendectomy appropriate? Surgery. 2009; 146:731–737.

11. Lin HF, Lai HS, Lai IR. Laparoscopic treatment of perforated appendicitis. World J Gastroenterol. 2014; 20:14338–14347.

12. Gürleyik G, Gürleyik E. Age-related clinical features in older patients with acute appendicitis. Eur J Emerg Med. 2003; 10:200–203.

13. Lee JF, Leow CK, Lau WY. Appendicitis in the elderly. Aust N Z J Surg. 2000; 70:593–596.