기관회원 [로그인]
소속기관에서 받은 아이디, 비밀번호를 입력해 주세요.
개인회원 [로그인]

비회원 구매시 입력하신 핸드폰번호를 입력해 주세요.
본인 인증 후 구매내역을 확인하실 수 있습니다.

회원가입
서지반출
한국형진단명기준환자군 분류체계의 동질성 평가
[STEP1]서지반출 형식 선택
파일형식
@
서지도구
SNS
기타
[STEP2]서지반출 정보 선택
  • 제목
  • URL
돌아가기
확인
취소
  • 한국형진단명기준환자군 분류체계의 동질성 평가
저자명
김형선,이선희,남정모,Kim. Hyung Seon,Lee. Sun Hee,Nam. Chung Mo
간행물명
Health policy and management
권/호정보
2013년|23권 1호|pp.44-51 (8 pages)
발행정보
한국보건행정학회
파일정보
정기간행물|
PDF텍스트
주제분야
기타
이 논문은 한국과학기술정보연구원과 논문 연계를 통해 무료로 제공되는 원문입니다.
서지반출

기타언어초록

Background: This study designed to evaluate the homogeneity of Korean diagnosis related group (KDRG) version 3.4 classification system. Methods: The total 5,921,873 claims data submitted to the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service during 2010 were used. Both coefficient of variation (CV) and reduction in variance of cost were measured for evaluation. This analysis was divided into before and after trimming outliers at the level of adjacent DRG (ADRG), aged ADRG (AADRG) split by age, and DRG split by complication and comorbidity. Results: At the each three level of ADRG, AADRG, and DRG, there were 38.9%, 38.7%, and 30.0% of which had a CV > 100% in the untrimmed data and there were 1.4%, 1.4%, and 1.9% in the trimmed one. Before trimming outliers, ADRGs explained 52.5% of the variability in resource use, AADRGs did 53.1% and DRGs did 57.1%. The additional explanatory power by age and comorbidity and complication (CC) split were 0.6%p and 4.6%p for each, which were statistically significant. After trimming outliers, ADRGs explained 75.2% of the variability in resource use, AADRGs did 75.6%, and DRGs did 77.1%. The additional explanatory power were 0.4%p and 2.0%p for each, which were statistically significant too. Conclusion: The results demonstrated that KDRG showed high homogeneity within groups and performance after trimming outliers. But there were DRGs CV > 100% after age or CC split and the most contributing factor to high performance of KDRG was the ADRG rather than age or CC split. Therefore, it is recommended that the efforts for improving clinical homogeneity of KDRG such as review of the hierarchical structure of classification systems and classification variables.