V Wienicke, T Denecke, J Henkelmann, R Jacob, Nikolaus von Dercks
{"title":"[InEK基准中的横断面诊断成像:放射学的机会]。","authors":"V Wienicke, T Denecke, J Henkelmann, R Jacob, Nikolaus von Dercks","doi":"10.1007/s00117-021-00963-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Based on the lump sum system which is calculated by the InEK (Institut für das Entgeltsystem im Krankenhaus), it is possible to compare one hospital's own performance data with all hospitals in Germany billing according to the Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG). The aim of this article is to investigate exceeding or undercutting of computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in comparison to the calculations made by the InEK to reveal potential for improvement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>InEK calculation data for 2021 were used to form comparative ratios for CT and MRI diagnostics at the DRG level. Data from a university hospital was compared at the hospital, departments, DRG and main diagnosis levels.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At the hospital level, there were 1025 more MRIs and 371 more CTs compared to InEK. Analysis by department showed, e.g., in neurology, 489 more MRIs and 620 fewer CTs. The benchmark of the DRGs showed in particular that DRG B70B was the driver of deviations in both diagnostic modalities (MRI [Formula: see text] CT [Formula: see text]). The identified deviations can be further analysed at the main diagnosis level.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Awareness of above-average use of cross-sectional imaging diagnostics can provide impetus for further development of clinical pathways of a hospital. The methodology of the InEK benchmark is applicable to every hospital and is able to identify processes with potential for improvement. The review of influencing factors as well as the evaluation by clinicians and economists are prerequisite for acceptance and success of the measures generated from the benchmark.</p>","PeriodicalId":54513,"journal":{"name":"Radiologe","volume":"62 4","pages":"343-349"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8983549/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Cross-sectional diagnostic imaging in the InEK benchmark : An opportunity for radiology].\",\"authors\":\"V Wienicke, T Denecke, J Henkelmann, R Jacob, Nikolaus von Dercks\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00117-021-00963-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Based on the lump sum system which is calculated by the InEK (Institut für das Entgeltsystem im Krankenhaus), it is possible to compare one hospital's own performance data with all hospitals in Germany billing according to the Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG). The aim of this article is to investigate exceeding or undercutting of computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in comparison to the calculations made by the InEK to reveal potential for improvement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>InEK calculation data for 2021 were used to form comparative ratios for CT and MRI diagnostics at the DRG level. Data from a university hospital was compared at the hospital, departments, DRG and main diagnosis levels.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At the hospital level, there were 1025 more MRIs and 371 more CTs compared to InEK. Analysis by department showed, e.g., in neurology, 489 more MRIs and 620 fewer CTs. The benchmark of the DRGs showed in particular that DRG B70B was the driver of deviations in both diagnostic modalities (MRI [Formula: see text] CT [Formula: see text]). The identified deviations can be further analysed at the main diagnosis level.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Awareness of above-average use of cross-sectional imaging diagnostics can provide impetus for further development of clinical pathways of a hospital. The methodology of the InEK benchmark is applicable to every hospital and is able to identify processes with potential for improvement. The review of influencing factors as well as the evaluation by clinicians and economists are prerequisite for acceptance and success of the measures generated from the benchmark.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54513,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Radiologe\",\"volume\":\"62 4\",\"pages\":\"343-349\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8983549/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Radiologe\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-021-00963-8\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiologe","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00117-021-00963-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:基于InEK (Institut f r das Entgeltsystem im Krankenhaus)计算的一次性付款系统,可以将一家医院自己的绩效数据与德国所有医院根据诊断相关小组(DRG)计费的数据进行比较。本文的目的是研究计算机断层扫描(CT)或磁共振成像(MRI)与InEK计算结果的对比,以揭示改进的潜力。方法:采用2021年InEK计算数据,形成DRG水平CT与MRI诊断的比较比率。对某大学附属医院的数据进行医院、科室、DRG和主要诊断水平的比较。结果:在医院水平上,与InEK相比,mri多1025次,ct多371次。科室分析显示,如神经内科,mri多了489次,ct少了620次。DRGs的基准特别表明,DRG B70B是两种诊断模式(MRI[公式:见文]CT[公式:见文])偏差的驱动因素。识别出的偏差可以在主要诊断水平上进一步分析。结论:提高对断层影像诊断使用率的认识,可以为医院临床路径的进一步发展提供动力。InEK基准的方法适用于每家医院,并能够确定有改进潜力的流程。对影响因素的审查以及临床医生和经济学家的评估是基准产生的措施被接受和成功的先决条件。
[Cross-sectional diagnostic imaging in the InEK benchmark : An opportunity for radiology].
Background: Based on the lump sum system which is calculated by the InEK (Institut für das Entgeltsystem im Krankenhaus), it is possible to compare one hospital's own performance data with all hospitals in Germany billing according to the Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG). The aim of this article is to investigate exceeding or undercutting of computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in comparison to the calculations made by the InEK to reveal potential for improvement.
Methods: InEK calculation data for 2021 were used to form comparative ratios for CT and MRI diagnostics at the DRG level. Data from a university hospital was compared at the hospital, departments, DRG and main diagnosis levels.
Results: At the hospital level, there were 1025 more MRIs and 371 more CTs compared to InEK. Analysis by department showed, e.g., in neurology, 489 more MRIs and 620 fewer CTs. The benchmark of the DRGs showed in particular that DRG B70B was the driver of deviations in both diagnostic modalities (MRI [Formula: see text] CT [Formula: see text]). The identified deviations can be further analysed at the main diagnosis level.
Conclusion: Awareness of above-average use of cross-sectional imaging diagnostics can provide impetus for further development of clinical pathways of a hospital. The methodology of the InEK benchmark is applicable to every hospital and is able to identify processes with potential for improvement. The review of influencing factors as well as the evaluation by clinicians and economists are prerequisite for acceptance and success of the measures generated from the benchmark.
期刊介绍:
Der Radiologe is an internationally recognized journal dealing with all aspects of radiology and serving the continuing medical education of radiologists in clinical and practical environments. The focus is on x-ray diagnostics, angiography computer tomography, interventional radiology, magnet resonance tomography, digital picture processing, radio oncology and nuclear medicine.
Comprehensive reviews on a specific topical issue focus on providing evidenced based information on diagnostics and therapy.
Freely submitted original papers allow the presentation of important clinical studies and serve the scientific exchange.
Review articles under the rubric ''Continuing Medical Education'' present verified results of scientific research and their integration into daily practice.