Maylath E
Medizinischer Dienst, Krankenversicherung Hamburg.
Gesundheitswesen. 2000 Dec;62(12):633-45. doi: 10.1055/s-2000-10429.
One of the most important provisions incorporated in the reform of the German health sector has been the introduction of a per case prospective payment system for hospitals with the exception of admissions to psychiatric care. The reasons for the exclusion of psychiatric care are unclear, but it is as a result all the more interesting to look at the experience of Hungary, where in-patient psychiatric care has been financed on the basis of diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) for the past seven years. The article describes how in the early 1990's the funding of the Hungarian health service was reorganized from being a state-financed system with a set budget to a system financed by contributions. Parallel to this development, service-related financing was introduced. In the hospital sector this involved DRGs. At the beginning of 1993 the Hungarian DRGs comprised only 437 categories, but this has since increased to 758. Furthermore, other characteristics are listed which, apart from the number of groups, differentiate the Hungarian DRGs from the AP-DRGs. Among other things, service-related financing includes non-typical areas such as psychiatry. In this case, it covers in-patient psychiatric care in an unusual combination of DRGs in the acute case category (50% of all beds in psychiatric units in Hungary are for acute cases) with daily nursing charges in the chronic case category. An analysis is given in the article of 16 homogeneous diagnostic categories in psychiatric care, followed by experiences gathered in conjunction with the application of this approach in this particular sphere, with special reference to three problem areas. These are as follows: the trend towards diagnoses with a relatively high weighting; the practice of charging for psychiatric DRGs in somatic wards; and, finally, the perpetuation of poor service structures and practices through DRGs. In general, evidently the introduction of psychiatric DRGs may also be recommended in Germany because of the danger that otherwise psychiatry might be marginalized and isolated in a corner for chronic medical cases. As the only discipline or specialist sphere with a non-service based budget there is a real threat that funding would be kept low. Thus, under the superior financial conditions in Germany, the disadvantages registered in Hungary would not occur or would become manifest only in a milder form. However, it is important that prior to implementation costing is done with extreme care to determine the relative weighting and duration of treatment for each of the categories and that following introduction of DRGs there is a regular control of coding practices, structure of diagnoses and case-mix changes.
德国医疗部门改革纳入的最重要规定之一,是除精神科护理住院外,对医院实行按病例预付费制度。将精神科护理排除在外的原因尚不清楚,但正因如此,审视匈牙利的经验就更有意思了,在过去七年里,匈牙利的住院精神科护理一直是根据诊断相关分组(DRG)进行资金筹集的。本文描述了20世纪90年代初匈牙利医疗服务的资金是如何从一个有固定预算的国家资助体系重组为一个由缴费资助的体系的。与此发展并行的是,引入了与服务相关的融资方式。在医院部门,这涉及到诊断相关分组。1993年初,匈牙利的诊断相关分组仅包括437个类别,但此后已增加到758个。此外,还列出了匈牙利诊断相关分组与急性病诊断相关分组(AP-DRG)不同的其他特征。与服务相关的融资尤其包括精神病学等非典型领域。在这种情况下,它涵盖了急性病例类别的诊断相关分组的一种不寻常组合中的住院精神科护理(匈牙利精神科病房50%的床位用于急性病例)以及慢性病类别中的每日护理费用。本文对精神科护理中的16个同类诊断类别进行了分析,随后介绍了在这一特定领域应用该方法所积累的经验,并特别提及了三个问题领域。具体如下:诊断权重相对较高的趋势;在躯体病房对精神科诊断相关分组收费的做法;最后,诊断相关分组导致服务结构和做法不佳的情况长期存在。总体而言,显然在德国也可推荐引入精神科诊断相关分组,因为否则精神科可能会被边缘化并在慢性病病例的角落里孤立开来。作为唯一一个没有基于服务预算的学科或专业领域,确实存在资金被维持在低水平的威胁。因此,在德国优越的财政条件下,匈牙利所记录的不利情况不会出现,或者只会以较温和的形式显现出来。然而,重要的是,在实施之前要极其谨慎地进行成本核算,以确定每个类别的相对权重和治疗时长,并且在引入诊断相关分组之后,要定期对编码做法、诊断结构和病例组合变化进行管控。