www.eurodrg.eu/EuroDRG_group.pdf. Funding: The presented results were conducted within the research project ‘EuroDRG – Diagnosis Related Groups in Europe: towards efficiency and quality’, which was funded by the European Commission under the Seventh Framework Programme. Research area: HEALTH-2007-3.2-8 European System of Diagnosis-Related Groups, Project reference: 223300.
DO DIAGNOSIS-RELATED GROUPS APPROPRIATELY EXPLAIN VARIATIONS IN COSTS AND LENGTH OF STAY OF HIP REPLACEMENT? A COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF DRG SYSTEMS ACROSS 10 EUROPEAN COUNTRIES
Article first published online: 19 JUL 2012
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Supplement: Diagnosis-Related Groups in Europe (EuroDRG): Do they explain variation in hospital costs and length of stay across patients and hospitals?
Volume 21, Issue Supplement S2, pages 103–115, August 2012
How to Cite
Geissler, A., Scheller-Kreinsen, D., Quentin, W. and on behalf of the EuroDRG group (2012), DO DIAGNOSIS-RELATED GROUPS APPROPRIATELY EXPLAIN VARIATIONS IN COSTS AND LENGTH OF STAY OF HIP REPLACEMENT? A COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF DRG SYSTEMS ACROSS 10 EUROPEAN COUNTRIES. Health Econ., 21: 103–115. doi: 10.1002/hec.2848
- Issue published online: 19 JUL 2012
- Article first published online: 19 JUL 2012
- diagnosis-related groups;
- cost analyses;
- length of stay;
- artificial joint implants;
- hip replacement;
This paper assesses the variations in costs and length of stay for hip replacement cases in Austria, England, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Poland, Spain and Sweden and examines the ability of national diagnosis-related group (DRG) systems to explain the variation in resource use against a set of patient characteristic and treatment specific variables. In total, 195 810 cases clustered in 712 hospitals were analyzed using OLS fixed effects models for cost data (n = 125 698) and negative binominal models for length-of-stay data (n = 70 112). The number of DRGs differs widely across the 10 European countries (range: 2–14). Underlying this wide range is a different use of classification variables, especially secondary diagnoses and treatment options are considered to a different extent. In six countries, a standard set of patient characteristics and treatment variables explain the variation in costs or length of stay better than the DRG variables. This raises questions about the adequacy of the countries' DRG system or the lack of specific criteria, which could be used as classification variables. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.