PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16908086

The risk of upcoding in casemix systems: a comparative study.

Abstract

With the introduction of a diagnosis related group (DRG) classification system in the Netherlands in 2005 it has become relevant to investigate the risk of upcoding. The problem of upcoding in the US casemix system is substantial. In 2004, the US Centres for Medicare and Medicaid estimated that the total number of improper Medicare payments for the Prospective Payment system for acute inpatient care (both short term and long term) amounted to US$ 4.8 billion (5.2%). By comparing the casemix systems in the US, Australian and Dutch healthcare systems, this article illustrates why certain casemix systems are more open to the risk of upcoding than other systems. This study identifies various market, control and casemix characteristics determining the weaknesses of a casemix reimbursement system to upcoding. It can be concluded that fewer opportunities for upcoding occur in casemix systems that do not allow for-profit ownership and in which the coder's salary does not depend on the outcome of the classification process. In addition, casemix systems in which the first point in time of registration is at the beginning of the care process and in which there are a limited number of occasions to alter the registration are less vulnerable to the risk of upcoding. Finally, the risk of upcoding is smaller in casemix systems that use classification criteria that are medically meaningful and aligned with clinical practice. Comparing the US, Australian and Dutch systems the following conclusions can be drawn. Given the combined occurrences of for-profit hospitals and the use of the secondary diagnosis criterion to classify DRGs, the US casemix system tends to be more open to upcoding than the Australian system. The strength of the Dutch system is related to the detailed classification scheme, using medically meaningful classification criteria. Nevertheless, the detailed classification scheme also causes a weakness, because of its increased complexity compared with the US and Australian system. It is recommended that researchers and policy makers carefully consider all relevant market, control and casemix characteristics when developing and restructuring casemix reimbursement systems.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Paul J M Steinbusch, Jan B Oostenbrink, Joost J Zuurbier, Frans J M Schaepkens. 2006-08-14. The risk of upcoding in casemix systems: a comparative study.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2006.06.002

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Whole genome characterisation of Australian and New Zealand OsHV-1 'μVar' like variants over time.

Ostreid herpesvirus 1 (OsHV-1) is a major pathogen of Pacific oysters (Magallana gigas), linked to mass mortality events worldwide and presents a substantial threat to global aquaculture. Since 2010, mortality events have been occurring in Pacific oysters within Australia with the cause being an OsHV-1 microvariant highly similar to OsHV-1 μVar first detected in France, 2008. In this study, fifteen OsHV-1 whole genomes were assembled from Australian and New Zealand mortality events, including twelve newly sequenced genomes and three assembled from public datasets. Whole-genome phylogenetic analyses indicate that Australian and New Zealand OsHV-1 isolates form a distinct clade, separate from European and East Asian genomes, and with moderate regional and temporal divergence across the past 14 years. Across the dataset, multiple biologically relevant mutations were observed in genes of known function, including DNA polymerase, ribonucleotide reductase subunits, and apoptosis-related proteins, though most mutations occurred in uncharacterised genes. These findings highlight the limitations of single-gene typing and support the need for whole-genome approaches in understanding OsHV-1 evolution. Critically, the lack of recent whole-genome data, particularly from East and Southeast Asia, restricts the ability to trace viral origins and detect novel variants, underscoring the need for expanded global OsHV-1 genomic surveillance.

Australia↗

Interest holder-driven research priorities in sexual and reproductive health for migrant and refugee adolescents and young adults in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and prioritise sexual and reproductive health research priorities for migrant and refugee adolescents and young adults in Australia using a priority setting partnership approach. METHODS: A James Lind Alliance priority setting partnership was conducted with 92 interest holders: 31 youth from migrant and refugee backgrounds and 61 professionals (healthcare providers, researchers, policymakers and community leaders), recruited online and in-person. The priority setting partnership process included a rapid evidence scan, an online uncertainty survey, evidence verification, interim prioritisation and a final consensus workshop. RESULTS: Eighty-three research uncertainties yielded 11 final priorities across four sexual and reproductive health domains: sexual and reproductive health literacy, sexual violence prevention, accessible services and maternal health. A striking divergence emerged between youth and professional priorities only 3 achieved combined high-priority consensus. Youth prioritised a broader range of topics, including abortion access (rated high by youth but low by professionals), while professionals prioritised fewer areas. Two priorities achieved consensus: community-based maternal health support and barriers to reporting gender-based violence. CONCLUSION: This is the first priority setting partnership to identify sexual and reproductive health research priorities for migrant and refugee youth in Australia and to uniquely highlight substantial misalignment between youth and professional priorities. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: These identified priorities provide a foundation for targeted research, culturally responsive policy and more equitable sexual and reproductive health service provision for migrant and refugee adolescents and young adults.

Australia↗