SynthesisActa cirurgica brasileira2023
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.
Synthesis in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 2023. 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.
- Impact of DRG policy on the performance of tertiary hospital inpatient services in Chongqing, China: an interrupted time series study, 2020-2023.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
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
purposeIn Brazil, healthcare services traditionally follow a fee-for-service (FFS) payment system, in which each medical procedure incurs a separate charge. An alternative reimbursement with the aim of reducing costs is diagnosis related group (DRG) remuneration, in which all patient care is covered by a fixed amount. This work aimed to perform a systematic review followed by meta-analysis to assess the effectiveness of the Budled Payment for Care Improvement (BPCI) versus FFS.
methodsOur work was performed following the items of the PRISMA report. We included only observational trials, and the primary outcome assessed was the effectiveness of FFS and DRG in appendectomy considering complications. We also assessed the costs and length of hospital stay. Meta-analysis was performed with Rev Man version 5.4.
resultsOut of 735 initially identified articles, six met the eligibility criteria. We demonstrated a shorter hospital stay associated with the DRG model (mean difference = 0.39; 95% confidence interval - 95%CI - 0.38-0.40; p < 0.00001; I2 = 0%), however the hospital readmission rate was higher in this model (odds ratio = 1.57; 95%CI 1.02-2.44, p = 0.04; I2 = 90%).
conclusionsThis study reveals a potential decrease in the length of stay for appendectomy patients using the DRG approach. However, no significant differences were observed in other outcomes analysis between the two approaches.
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.