Fortune John B, Wohltmann Christopher, Margold Brenda, Callahan Charles D, Sutyak John
Southern Illinois Trauma Center, Springfield, Illinois, USA.
J Trauma. 2005 Mar;58(3):482-6. doi: 10.1097/01.ta.0000157821.42380.55.
The trauma response fee (UB-92:68x) recently has been approved, to be used by hospitals to cover expenses resulting from continuous trauma team availability. These charges may be made by designated trauma centers for all defined trauma patients when notification has been received before arrival (eligible pt). This study compares two trauma centers' performance in collecting this fee help define methodologies that can enhance reimbursement.
Our trauma system uses two hospitals (A and B) that are designated as the Level I trauma center for the region on alternate years. This allows hospital performance comparisons with relatively consistent patient demographics, injury severity, and payer mix. Data were collected for a one-year period beginning on January 1, 2003 and included charges, collections, and payer source for the trauma response fee. This time frame allowed the comparison of two six-month sequential periods at each trauma center.
Out of a total of 871 trauma patients, 625 were eligible for the trauma response fee (72%): hospital A = 65% and hospital B = 77%. Total trauma response fee charges for both centers were 1,111,882 dollars with collections of 319,684 dollars (28.8%). The following payer sources contributed to the collections: Indemnity insurance (77.4%), Managed Care (22.1%), Medicare (0.3%), and Medicaid (0.2%). No collections were obtained from any self-pay patient. Eligible patients were charged a trauma response fee much less frequently in Hospital A than B (29.35% versus 95.2%) but revenue / charge ratios were equivalent at both hospitals (0.32 versus 0.28). These differences resulted in markedly enhanced revenue for each eligible patient in Hospital B compared with A (735 dollars versus 174 dollars)
Enhanced collection by hospital B was a result of a higher charge, compulsive billing of all eligible patients, and emphasis on pre-admission designation of trauma patients. Effective billing and collection process related to trauma response fees results in substantial additional revenue for the trauma center without additional expense.
创伤应对费用(通用账单92:68x)最近已获批准,供医院用于支付因持续配备创伤团队而产生的费用。当在患者到达前收到通知时(符合条件的患者),指定的创伤中心可对所有明确的创伤患者收取这些费用。本研究比较了两个创伤中心在收取这笔费用方面的表现,以确定可提高报销率的方法。
我们的创伤系统使用两家医院(A和B),这两家医院每隔一年被指定为该地区的一级创伤中心。这使得能够在患者人口统计学、损伤严重程度和付款人组合相对一致的情况下比较医院的表现。收集了从2003年1月1日开始的一年期数据,包括创伤应对费用的收费、收款和付款人来源。这个时间框架允许对每个创伤中心的两个连续六个月期间进行比较。
在总共871名创伤患者中,625名符合收取创伤应对费用的条件(72%):医院A为65%,医院B为77%。两个中心的创伤应对费用总计为1111882美元,收款为319684美元(28.8%)。以下付款人来源构成了收款:赔偿保险(77.4%)、管理式医疗(22.1%)、医疗保险(0.3%)和医疗补助(0.2%)。没有从任何自费患者那里收到收款。医院A对符合条件的患者收取创伤应对费用的频率远低于医院B(29.35%对95.2%),但两家医院的收入/收费比率相当(0.32对0.28)。这些差异导致医院B中每个符合条件的患者的收入比医院A显著增加(735美元对174美元)。
医院B收款增加是由于收费较高、对所有符合条件的患者强制计费以及强调创伤患者入院前的指定。与创伤应对费用相关的有效计费和收款流程可为创伤中心带来大量额外收入,而无需增加费用。