| Title |
Early results of pediatric appendicitis after adoption of diagnosis-related group-based payment system in South Korea
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/jmdh.s95937 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Suk-Bae Moon |
| Abstract |
As an alternative to the existing fee-for-service (FFS) system, a diagnosis-related group (DRG)-based payment system has been suggested. The aim of this study was to investigate the early results of pediatric appendicitis treatment under the DRG system, focusing on health care expenditure and quality of health care services. The medical records of 60 patients, 30 patients before (FFS group), and 30 patients after adoption of the DRG system (DRG), were reviewed retrospectively. Mean hospital stay was shortened, but the complication and readmission rates did not worsen in the DRG. Overall health care expenditure and self-payment decreased from Korean Won (KRW) 2,499,935 and KRW 985,540, respectively, in the FFS group to KRW 2,386,552 and KRW 492,920, respectively, in the DRG. The insurer's payment increased from KRW 1,514,395 in the FFS group to KRW 1,893,632 in the DRG. For patients in the DRG, calculation by the DRG system yielded greater overall expenditure (KRW 2,020,209 vs KRW 2,386,552) but lower self-payment (KRW 577,803 vs KRW 492,920) than calculation by the FFS system. The DRG system worked well in pediatric patients with acute appendicitis in terms of cost-effectiveness over the short term. The gradual burden on the national health insurance fund should be taken into consideration. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 22% |
| Researcher | 6 | 22% |
| Professor | 3 | 11% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 6 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 44% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 3 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 6 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 November 2015.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#900
of 1,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,310
of 294,815 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare
#9
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,001 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,815 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.