Hsia D C
US Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, Washington, DC.
J AHIMA. 1992 Sep;63(9):56-64.
Congress created the peer review organizations (PROs), in part, to check the accuracy of diagnosis related groups (DRGs) billed to Medicare. This study determined the accuracy of the peer review organizations' abstraction of DRGs during federal fiscal year 1985. A two-stage cluster design sampled 7050 medical records from 239 hospitals stratified by size. Credentialed medical record professionals used blinded techniques with reliability checks to abstract the ICD-9-CM codes and select the correct DRGs. Physicians reviewed medical records whose abstracted DRG differed from the DRG paid by the fiscal intermediary. The peer review organizations reported abstracting 1715 of these discharges. The peer review organization selected the correct DRG in 75.6 percent of the 1715 abstractions, a significantly lower proportion than the 80.3 percent paid accurately by the fiscal intermediaries. Upcoding compounded the peer review organizations' errors.
国会设立了同行评审组织(PROs),部分目的是核查向医疗保险机构申报的诊断相关分组(DRGs)的准确性。本研究确定了1985财年联邦财政年度同行评审组织对DRGs进行摘要提取的准确性。采用两阶段整群设计,从239家按规模分层的医院中抽取了7050份病历。具有资质的病历专业人员采用盲法技术并进行可靠性检查,以提取ICD - 9 - CM编码并选择正确的DRGs。医生对那些摘要提取的DRG与财务中介机构支付的DRG不同的病历进行了复查。同行评审组织报告称对其中1715例出院病例进行了摘要提取。在这1715次摘要提取中,同行评审组织选择了正确DRG的比例为75.6%,这一比例显著低于财务中介机构准确支付的80.3%。高编加剧了同行评审组织的错误。