期刊文献+

2015年北京某医院神经科主诊医师组DRGs指标分析 被引量:5

DRG Index Analysis for Attending Neurologist Groups in a Hospital in 2015
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的分析研究医院神经科部分主诊医师组的DRGs指标,发现优势与不足,为主诊医师绩效考核与管理提供建议。方法以国家版DRGs(CN-DRGs)分组方式,运用病例组合指数、费用消耗指数、时间消耗指数等指标对2015年神经科脑血管病、癫痫、神经介入各主诊医师组进行分析。结果神经介入主诊医师组的CMI最高,癫痫主诊医师组的CMI最低,全部主诊组的费用消耗指数均小于1,癫痫主诊组的时间消耗指数均超过1,介入主诊组的时间消耗指数最低,为0.5。结论应用DRGs指标,评价各主诊医师组的住院绩效情况,可以客观、公平地评价其医疗能力与医疗效率,树立标杆,促进各主诊组竞争。 Objectives To analysis the DRG indicators for attending neurologist groups relevant sections in research hospital, discover the advantages and disadvantages to provide recommendations for the development of attending groups.Methods To analyze on patients discharged from the hospital with the application of case-mixindex(CMI), time-consuming index, cost-consuming index, as well as other indicators according to CN-DRG grouping packet mode, in neurological cerebrovascular disease, epilepsy, neuropathic involvement of each attending group.Results Neural involvement attending group's CMI was the highest, epilepsy attending group's CMI was the lowest.All of the attending groups cost-consumption index was less than 1, both the epilepsy attending groups time-consuming index was over 1, and involved attending groups time-consuming index was the lowest, which was 0.5. Conclusions Applications DRG indicators to evaluate inpatient performance situation of each attending group can objectively and fairly evaluate their medical capabilities and medical efficiency, establish a benchmark,promote the competition among each attending groups.
作者 李小莹 仇叶龙 冀冰心 张艳红 王力红 Li Xiaoying Qiu Yelong Ji Bingxin Zhang Yanhong Wang Lihong(Xuanwu Hospital Affiliated to Capital Medical University, Beijing 100053, China)
出处 《中国病案》 2016年第11期53-55,共3页 Chinese Medical Record
基金 北京地区三级甲等综合医院临床科室医疗质量关键指标比较研究(14JDZHB021)
关键词 主诊医师组 DRGS 绩效评价 Attending doctors group DRGs Performance evaluation
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

二级参考文献33

  • 1简伟研,胡牧,崔涛,王洪源,黄因敏,张修梅.运用疾病诊断相关组进行临床服务绩效评价初探[J].中华医院管理杂志,2006,22(11):736-739. 被引量:90
  • 2武广华.DRG_s的发展及我国的相关研究[J].中国医院管理,2007,27(7):10-12. 被引量:48
  • 3Grimaldi PL, Micheletti JA. Diagnosis related groups:a p racti- tioner's guide[M]. Chicago:Pluribus Press, 1982:38 41.
  • 4Iezzoni L. Risk adjustment for measuring health care outcomes[M]. 3rd ed. Chicago: Health Administration Press, 2003.
  • 5Francis HRF. Case mix use in 25 countries:a migration success but international comparisons failure[J]. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 2003, 70: 215-219.
  • 6Bala MV,Zarkin GA. Application of cost effectiveness analysis to multiple products: a practical guide[J]. Am J Manag Care, 2002, 8(3): 211 218.
  • 7Kattcy E. Two decades of casemix. Department of Health and Ageing[EB/OL]. [2011-09-14]. http://www. health. gov. au/ int ernet/main/publishing. nsf/Content.
  • 8Jian WY,Lu M, Cui T, et al. Evaluating performance of local case-mix system by international comparison: a case study in Beijing,China[J]. International Journal of Health Planning and Management, 2011, 26(4): 471-481.
  • 9Jian WY,Chan KY, Tang SN, et al. A case study of the coun terpart technical support policy to improve rural health services in Beijing. BMC Health Services Research 2012, 12[EB/OL]. [2012]. http://www. biomedcentral. com/content/pdf/1472-6963-12-482. pdf.
  • 10Lichtig LK. Hospital information system for ease mix management[M]. New York:John Wiley & Sons Press, 1986.

共引文献190

同被引文献47

引证文献5

二级引证文献27

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部