• U Schütz, H Reichel, and K Dreinhöfer.
• Orthopädische Universitätsklinik Ulm am RKU. uwe.schuetz@uniklinik-ulm.de
• Z Orthop Unfall. 2007 May 1;145(3):356-65.

AimWe introduce a grouping system for clinical practice which allows the separation of DRG coding in specific orthopaedic groups based on anatomic regions, operative procedures, therapeutic interventions and morbidity equivalent diagnosis groups. With this, a differentiated aim-oriented analysis of illustrated internal DRG data becomes possible.MethodsThe group-specific difference of the coding quality between the DRG groups following primary coding by the orthopaedic surgeon and final coding by the medical controlling is analysed. In a consecutive series of 1600 patients parallel documentation and group-specific comparison of the relevant DRG parameters were carried out in every case after primary and final coding.ResultsAnalysing the group-specific share in the additional CaseMix coding, the group "spine surgery" dominated, closely followed by the groups "arthroplasty" and "surgery due to infection, tumours, diabetes". Altogether, additional cost-weight-relevant coding was necessary most frequently in the latter group (84%), followed by group "spine surgery" (65%). In DRGs representing conservative orthopaedic treatment documented procedures had nearly no influence on the cost weight.ConclusionsThe introduced system of case group analysis in internal DRG documentation can lead to the detection of specific problems in primary coding and cost-weight relevant changes of the case mix. As an instrument for internal process control in the orthopaedic field, it can serve as a communicative interface between an economically oriented classification of the hospital performance and a specific problem solution of the medical staff involved in the department management.

16 keywords...

hide…