How recalibration method, pricing, and coding affect DRG weights.
We compared diagnosis-related group (DRG) weights calculated using the hospital-specific relative-value (HSRV) methodology with those calculated using the standard methodology for each year from 1985 through 1989 and analyzed differences between the two methods in detail for 1989. We provide evidence suggesting that classification error and subsidies of higher weighted cases by lower weighted cases caused compression in the weights used for payment as late as the fifth year of the prospective payment system. However, later weights calculated by the standard method are not compressed because a statistical correlation between high markups and high case-mix indexes offsets the cross-subsidization. HSRV weights from the same files are compressed because this methodology is more sensitive to cross-subsidies. However, both sets of weights produce equally good estimates of hospital-level costs net of those expenses that are paid by outlier payments. The greater compression of the HSRV weights is counterbalanced by the fact that more high-weight cases qualify as outliers.
Carter
G M
GM
RAND, Santa Monica, CA 90407.
Rogowski
J A
JA
D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D003953:Diagnosis-Related Groups / Q000145:classification* / Q000191:economics; D004469:Economics, Hospital / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D005249:Fees and Charges / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D008137:Longitudinal Studies; D008499:Medical Records / Q000145:classification; D006278:Medicare / Q000191:economics* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D011445:Prospective Payment System / Q000191:economics*; D012044:Regression Analysis; D015895:Relative Value Scales; D014481:United States