ArticleAnnals of surgical treatment and research2016
Does Korea's current diagnosis-related group-based reimbursement system appropriately classify appendectomy patients?
Article in Annals of surgical treatment and research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparing financing models for supplementary healthcare in appendectomy: activity-based costing (fee-for-service) vs. diagnosis related group remuneration (bundled payment) - a systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2023Pooled it
- Comparing the Postoperative Outcomes of Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy and Three Port Appendectomy With Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol for Acute Appendicitis: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.Annals of coloproctology · 2021Article
- Surgical rectus sheath block combined with multimodal pain management reduces postoperative pain and analgesic requirement after single-incision laparoscopic appendectomy: a retrospective study.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Article
- The Effects of Preoperative Pain Education on the Decision to Discharge Patients Following Single-Incision Laparoscopic Appendectomy.Annals of coloproctology · 2020Article
- The New Diagnosis-Related Group Reimbursement System and Laboratory Test Quality in Korea: Analysis of External Quality Assessment Results.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Effects of a mandatory DRG payment system in South Korea: Analysis of multi-year nationwide hospital claims data.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- Observational
- Meaningful standard of reference for appendiceal perforation: pathology, surgery, or both?Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2017Article
- Clinical implication of discrepancies between surgical and pathologic diagnoses of acute appendicitis.Annals of surgical treatment and research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAs 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.
methodsWe 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.
resultsAlthough 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).
conclusionIt 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.
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.