PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10628106

A classification scheme for outcome indicators.

Abstract

PURPOSE: To provide a framework for classifying outcome indicators for a more comprehensive view of outcomes and quality. METHODS: Review of outcomes literature published since 1974 from medicine, nursing, and health services research to identify indicators. Outcome indicators were clustered inductively. FINDINGS: Three groups of outcome indicators were identified: patient-focused, provider-focused, and organization-focused. Although investigators tend to focus on a select few outcome indicators, such as patient satisfaction, quality of life, and mortality, many indicators exist to measure outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Selecting and integrating a wide array of outcome indicators from the various categories will provide a more balanced view of health care delivery as compared with focusing on a few common indicators or only one category.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

B M Jennings, N Staggers, L R Brosch. 1999. A classification scheme for outcome indicators.. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.1999.tb00524.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[Upcoding--a risk for the use of diagnosis-related groups].

BACKGROUND: Upcoding id defined by a systematic and deliberate shift in the case mix of a hospital in order to improve reimbursement. Upcoding is frequently mentioned as a reason for ineffective reimbursement under a DRG payment system. METHOD: A systematic literature search identified relevant studies concerning the extent of the Upcoding. Results are used for estimating the magnitude of Upcoding in Germany. RESULTS: Studies showed different estimates for Upcoding. Transferred to Germany roughly up to 1% of the payments for inpatient care are estimated to Upcoding. After 4 to 5 years the level of Upcoding decreases. To what extent Upcoding could be taken into account when setting the DRG reimbursement fees, remains open. Regarding the creation of epidemiological time series Upcoding causes a abrupt change in statistics. However this disadvantage is offset by the more complete coding under a DRG payment system. CONSEQUENCES: When setting the DRG reimbursement fees the elimination of the contribution of Upcoding share to the total shift in case mix can only be done retrospectively. Thus a rule for compensation of subsequent years is likely. Likewise the possibly different distribution of Upcoding among hospitals and their departments requires further investigation.

Diagnosis-Related Groups↗