期刊文献+

基于DRGs的新生儿产伤发生率调整研究 被引量:3

Risk-adjusting Effect of DRGs on Birth Trauma Rate
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的对新生儿产伤情况及影响因素进行调查,评价WI-DRGs对新生儿产伤风险模型的调整效果,探讨WI-DRGs对质量指标评估的作用。方法对3所医疗机构2011—2016年新生儿产伤率及影响因素进行分析,并建立DRGs调整的新生儿产伤logistic回归模型,评估WI-DRGs对新生儿产伤率的调整效果。结果新生儿产伤发生率为0.852/‰,对新生儿产伤有统计意义的影响因素为新生儿出生体重、产妇合并症与并发症、WI-DRGs分组等。应用logistic模型估计期望新生儿产伤数,计算甲、乙、丙医院新生儿产伤比(实际/期望)分别为1.082、1.050、0.839。结论 WI-DRGs是有效的质量指标调整工具,今后应在新生儿产伤率的研究基础上,利用DRGs结合NLP、QDM等信息应用技术,开发并建立适合我国妇幼专科的信息化综合质量评估平台。 Objective To evaluate the adjusting effects of WI-DRGs on the birth trauma of newborns, and explore the effect of WI-DRGs on quality evaluation. Methods Birth traumas data from 3 hospitals from 2011 to 2016 were analyzed by univariate analysis and logistic regression to evaluate the effects of WI-DRGs and other factors. Results The overall birth trauma rate of newborn is 0.852/1000. The univarate analysis shows that birth weight, puerpera’s complication and comforbidity, and WI-DRGs have the statistical significant effects on the birth trauma of newborn. The expected counts of birth trauma of newborn are calculated by logistic regression, and the ratio of real counts to expected counts are 1.082, 1.050 and 0.839 for 3 hospitals, respectively. Conclusion WI-DRGs is a effective quality evaluating tool. WI-DRGs, integrated with the NLP and QDM technology, can be used to build a comprehensive quality evaluation system for women and children specialty based on its application on birth trauma. Consequently, quality data will be managed and assessed developed and established.
出处 《中国医院管理》 北大核心 2018年第2期34-36,共3页 Chinese Hospital Management
基金 广东省科技计划项目(2014A040401042) 广东省科技计划项目(2017A040405032)
关键词 新生儿产伤发生率 质量指标 疾病诊断相关组 birth trauma rate quality measures DRGs
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

二级参考文献13

  • 1何凡,沈毅,刘碧瑶,汪萍,姚炯.浙江省住院病人病例组合研究[J].中华医院管理杂志,2006,22(7):460-464. 被引量:21
  • 2Palmer G,Reid B. Evaluation of the performance of diagnosis-related groups and similar casemix systems: methodological issues. Health Services Management Research, 2001,14(2) :71-81.
  • 3Institut far das Entgeltsystem im Krankenhaus~ C-DRG Systems 2015. lnstitut far das Entgdtsystem im Krankenhaus,2014.
  • 4Busse R, Geissler A, Quentin W, et al. Diagnosis-Related Groups in Europe: Moving towards transparency, efficiency and quality in hospitals[M]. McGraw-Hill International,2011.
  • 5Minist~re des Affaires sociales et de la Sant6. Manuel des groupes homog~nes de malades, ll~me version de la classification, 56me r6vision (llf). Minist~re des Affaires sociales et de la Sant~, 2014.
  • 6National Casemix Office. HRG4 Code to Group V4.5. Health and Social Care Information Centre, 2014.
  • 7Averill RF,Muldoon JH,Vertrees JC, et al. The evolution of easemix measurement using diagnosis related groups (DRGs)[J]. waningford: 3M Health Information Systems,1998.
  • 8Steinbusch PJ,Oostenbrink JB,Zuurbier JJ, et al. The risk of upcoding in casemix systems: a comparative study[J]. Health Policy,2007,81 (2) :289-299.
  • 9Victorian Government Department of Human. ictoria,public hospitals, policy and funding guidelines 1997- 1998. Victorian Gov ernment Department of Human Services, 1997.
  • 10Centers For Medicare And Medicaid. Improper Medicare fee-for service payments long reports. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, 2005.

共引文献3

同被引文献18

引证文献3

二级引证文献6

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