Spine · 2025
Impact of Complications on DRG Assignment for Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery Using the ISSG-AO Classification System.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Nayak Pratibha, Hostin Richard, Klineberg Eric O, Lafage Renaud, Cardona Alfredo E, Oreilly Brendan T, Line Breton, Passias Peter G, Bess Shay, Kebaish Khaled, Lenke Lawrence G, Shaffrey Christopher I, Daniels Alan H, Diebo Bassel G, Ames Christopher, Burton Doug, Lewis Stephen, Eastlack Robert K, Mundis Gregory M, Nunley Pierce, Hart Robert A, Mullin Jeff, Hamilton D Kojo, Lafage Virginie, Gupta Munish, Kelly Michael P, Protopsaltis Themistocles S, Kim Han Jo, Schwab Frank, Smith Justin S, Gum Jeffery L, ISSG
Аннотация
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort.
OBJECTIVE: The ISSG-AO Spinal Deformity Complication Classification System (SDCCS) predicts Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG) coding and cost.
BACKGROUND: Inconsistent definitions of complications contribute to variation in reported surgical complication rates. Incorrect complication reporting can lead to over or under DRG reimbursement. The ISSG-AO SDCCS provides improved complication reporting reproducibility and may help predict complication costs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: ASD patients were grouped into DRG without complication or comorbidity (CC) or Major CC (MCC) (DRGs 455 and 458), with CC (DRGs 454 and 457), and with MCC (DRGs 453 and 456). Complications were graded by intervention severity per ISSG-AO system: grade 0 (none), 1 (mild- e.g. , med change), 2 (moderate- e.g. , ICU), 3 (severe- e.g. , reoperation). Costs were based on the Medicare inpatient prospective payment system (IPSS, Medicare Allowable rate). A multinomial logistic model identified key predictors of DRG assignment by complication grades.
RESULTS: Of the 675 patients, 14% were in DRGs without CC/MCC, 71% in DRGs with CC, and 15% were in DRGs with MCC. Patients with complications requiring intervention mostly fell into the higher DRG categories (97%). Patients who received an intervention are 6.75 (2.01-22.75, P <0.0021) times more likely to be classified under DRG with CC and 15.72 (95% CI: 4.23-58.45, P <0.0001) times more likely to be classified with DRG with MCC compared with those who did not receive an intervention. Each unit increase in Edmonton Frailty Score raises the odds of being in DRG with MCC by 1.24 (95% CI: 1.04-1.48, P =0.017). Similar trends were seen for OR time and LOS. Reimbursement showed incremental increase from $49.5K to $56K to $70K across DRG categories.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with elevated ISSG-AO scores are more likely to be categorized into higher DRGs, experience extended lengths of stay and generate greater health care expenditures. The ISSG-AO SDCCS predicts DRG, thereby helping standardize complication reporting.
OBJECTIVE: The ISSG-AO Spinal Deformity Complication Classification System (SDCCS) predicts Diagnosis-Related Group (DRG) coding and cost.
BACKGROUND: Inconsistent definitions of complications contribute to variation in reported surgical complication rates. Incorrect complication reporting can lead to over or under DRG reimbursement. The ISSG-AO SDCCS provides improved complication reporting reproducibility and may help predict complication costs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: ASD patients were grouped into DRG without complication or comorbidity (CC) or Major CC (MCC) (DRGs 455 and 458), with CC (DRGs 454 and 457), and with MCC (DRGs 453 and 456). Complications were graded by intervention severity per ISSG-AO system: grade 0 (none), 1 (mild- e.g. , med change), 2 (moderate- e.g. , ICU), 3 (severe- e.g. , reoperation). Costs were based on the Medicare inpatient prospective payment system (IPSS, Medicare Allowable rate). A multinomial logistic model identified key predictors of DRG assignment by complication grades.
RESULTS: Of the 675 patients, 14% were in DRGs without CC/MCC, 71% in DRGs with CC, and 15% were in DRGs with MCC. Patients with complications requiring intervention mostly fell into the higher DRG categories (97%). Patients who received an intervention are 6.75 (2.01-22.75, P <0.0021) times more likely to be classified under DRG with CC and 15.72 (95% CI: 4.23-58.45, P <0.0001) times more likely to be classified with DRG with MCC compared with those who did not receive an intervention. Each unit increase in Edmonton Frailty Score raises the odds of being in DRG with MCC by 1.24 (95% CI: 1.04-1.48, P =0.017). Similar trends were seen for OR time and LOS. Reimbursement showed incremental increase from $49.5K to $56K to $70K across DRG categories.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with elevated ISSG-AO scores are more likely to be categorized into higher DRGs, experience extended lengths of stay and generate greater health care expenditures. The ISSG-AO SDCCS predicts DRG, thereby helping standardize complication reporting.