ArticleAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2016
Emergency readmissions to paediatric surgery and urology: The impact of inappropriate coding.
Article in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction In England, emergency readmissions within 30 days of hospital discharge after an elective admission are not reimbursed if they do not meet Payment by Results (PbR) exclusion criteria. However, coding errors could inappropriately penalise hospitals. We aimed to assess the accuracy of coding for emergency readmissions. Methods Emergency readmissions attributed to paediatric surgery and urology between September 2012 and August 2014 to our tertiary referral centre were retrospectively reviewed. Payment by Results (PbR) coding data were obtained from the hospital's Family Health Directorate. Clinical details were obtained from contemporaneous records. All readmissions were categorised as appropriately coded (postoperative or nonoperative) or inappropriately coded (planned surgical readmission, unrelated surgical admission, unrelated medical admission or coding error). Results Over the 24-month period, 241 patients were coded as 30-day readmissions, with 143 (59%) meeting the PbR exclusion criteria. Of the remaining 98 (41%) patients, 24 (25%) were inappropriately coded as emergency readmissions. These readmissions resulted in 352 extra bed days, of which 117 (33%) were attributable to inappropriately coded cases. Conclusions One-quarter of non-excluded emergency readmissions were inappropriately coded, accounting for one-third of additional bed days. As a stay on a paediatric ward costs up to £500 a day, the potential cost to our institution due to inappropriate readmission coding was over £50,000. Diagnoses and the reason for admission for each care episode should be accurately documented and coded, and readmission data should be reviewed at a senior clinician level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.