A COMPARISON OF PCS CONSTRUCTION PRINCIPLES OF THE AMERICAN DRGS , THE AUSTRIAN LDF SYSTEM , AND THE GERMAN FP / S E SYSTEM
A COMPARISON OF PCS CONSTRUCTION PRINCIPLES OF THE AMERICAN DRGS , THE AUSTRIAN LDF SYSTEM , AND THE GERMAN FP / S E SYSTEM
复制标题
美国DRGS、奥地利LDF系统、德国FP/S E系统PCS结构原理比较
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2002
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
W. Fischer
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
W. Fischer
德国医院协会委托的专家意见将 DRG 系统 HCFA-DRG、AP-DRG 和 APR-DRG 与两种德语 PCS 进行了比较：奥地利 LDF 系统和德国统一病例费率 (FP) 和手术室特殊费用系统。程序（SE）。结论是： 1. 单独使用医生的标准、对主要诊断的要求以及各系统对“医院病例”一词缺乏充分的定义，导致整个系统缺乏同质性。 PCS 不必作为一个整体进行调整。 2. 虽然调整 PCS 组和某些算法来计算数字（例如重量或调整点）可能很有用，但接管数字本身是有问题的。 3、使用PCS还需要创建一整套薪酬体系的周边组件。
For an expert opinion commissioned by the German Hospital Association the DRG systems HCFA-DRG, AP-DRG and APR-DRG were compared with the two German -language PCSs: the Austrian LDF system and the German system of Flat Case Rates (FPs) and Special Fees for O.R. procedures (SEs). The concluding findings were: 1. The use of doctors' criteria alone, the requirement of main diagnoses, and the lack of an adequate definition of the term "hospital case" in all systems result in a lack of homogeneity throughout. PCSs do not have to be adapted as a whole. 2. Whereas it can be useful to adapt the PCS groups and perhaps some algorithms to calculate figures (such as weights or trim points), it is problematic to take over the figures themselves. 3. The use of a PCS also requires the creation of a whole set of surrounding components of the remuneration system.