title: [Consistency and Reliability of MDK Expertise Examining the Encoding in the German DRG System].
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Hospital inpatient stays are reimbursed on the basis of German diagnosis-related groups (G-DRG). The G-DRG classification system is based on complex coding guidelines. The Medical Review Board of the Statutory Health Insurance Funds (MDK) examines the encoding by hospitals and delivers individual expertises on behalf of the German statutory health insurance companies in cases in which irregularities are suspected. A study was conducted on the inter-rater reliability of the MDK expertises regarding the scope of the assessment.
  
  
  METHODS
  A representative sample of 212 MDK expertises was taken from a selected pool of 1 392 MDK expertises in May 2013. This representative sample underwent a double-examination by 2 independent MDK experts using a special software based on the 3MTM G-DRG Grouper 2013 of 3M Medica, Germany. The following items encoded by the hospitals were examined: DRG, principal diagnosis, secondary diagnoses, procedures and additional payments. It was analysed whether the results of MDK expertises were consistent, reliable and correct.
  
  
  RESULTS
  202 expertises were eligible for evaluation, containing a total of 254 questions regarding one or more of the 5 items encoded by hospitals. The double-examination by 2 independent MDK experts showed matching results in 187 questions (73.6%) meaning they had been examined consistently and correctly. 59 questions (23.2%) did not show matching results, nevertheless they had been examined correctly regarding the scope of the assessment. None of the principal diagnoses was significantly affected by inconsistent or wrong judgment.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  A representative sample of MDK expertises examining the DRG encoding by hospitals showed a very high percentage of correct examination by the MDK experts. Identical MDK expertises cannot be achieved in all cases due to the scope of the assessment. Further improvement and simplification of codes and coding guidelines are required to reduce the scope of assessment with regard to correct DRG encoding and its examination.
authors.affiliation: Medizinischer Dienst der Krankenversicherung in Hessen, Stabs- und Servicebereich Wissen und Kommunikation, Oberursel.
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Gaertner
authors.affiliation: Medizinischer Dienst der Krankenversicherung in Hessen, Geschäftsbereich Krankenhaus, Oberursel.
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Lehr
authors.affiliation: Medizinischer Dienst der Krankenversicherung in Hessen, Controlling, Oberursel.
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Blum
authors.affiliation: Medizinischer Dienst der Krankenversicherung in Hessen, Ärztliche Leitung, Oberursel.
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: van Essen
mesh_terms: D003953:Diagnosis-Related Groups / Q000592:standards / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D005104:Expert Testimony / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000592:standards* / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D005249:Fees and Charges; D005858:Germany; D006760:Hospitalization / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D009313:National Health Programs / Q000592:standards / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011361:Professional Competence / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011785:Quality Assurance, Health Care / Q000592:standards / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D011907:Rate Setting and Review / Q000592:standards / Q000706:statistics & numerical data