Dataset Information

Shaping the System - The DRG Evaluation Project of the German Society for Gynaecology and Obstetrics (Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Gynakologie und Geburtshilfe, DGGG).

ABSTRACT: Introduction: The German DRG system is annually adapted to the changing services provided. For the further development, the self-governing body and its DRG Institute (InEK) depend on participation of the users. Methods: For one of the DRG evaluation projects initiated by DGGG, cost and performance data for the year 2011 from 16 hospitals were available. After plausibility checks and corrections, analyses for service and cost homogeneity were performed. In cases of inadequate DRG-representation attributes were sought that would make an appropriate reimbursement possible. Conspicuities and potential solutions were checked for clinical plausibility. Results: 44 concrete modification proposals for further development of the G-DRG system were formulated and submitted in due time to the InEK. In addition, 3 modification proposals were addressed to the German Institute for Medical Documentation and Information (Deutsches Institut für Medizinische Dokumentation und Information, DIMDI) for further development of the diagnosis classification ICD-10-GM. For all modification proposals care was taken to minimise misdirected incentives and to reduce the potential for disputes with the cost bearers and their auditors services in settlements. Discussion: The publication of the G-DRG system 2014 shows which modification proposals have been realised. Essentially, an appropriate redistribution of the resources among the gynaecological and obstetrics departments is to be expected. The financial pressure that is caused by the generally inadequate financing of hospitals will not be reduced by a further development of the G-DRG system.

SUBMITTER: Fiori W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3858986 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: The shortage of skilled personnel is ubiquitous, basic and further training is a key aspect in the recruitment of new medical colleagues. The significance of the nursing practicum in its function as gateway to the gynaecology and obstetrics discipline is practically unexplored. Methods: In an online questionnaire, medical students in all German faculties were questioned about the practica in their courses. The questionnaire reached 9079 medical students. 149 participants in nursing practica were selectively asked to answer 140 questions. We analysed those students who could, on the basis of their experiences in nursing practica, imagine undertaking an internship (clinical elective) in gynaecology (internship yes "Iy") separately from those who could not or were still undecided (internship no "In" or, respectively, internship perhaps "Ip"). Results: Altogether 149 medical students who participated in a nursing practicum in the gynaecology discipline were selected, of these 94.9?% were female. 92 (61.7?%) of the students replied that, after their gynaecological nursing practicum, they wanted to undertake an internship in gynaecology (Iy); 39 (26.2?%) answered negatively (In) and 18 (12.1?%) were still undecided (Ip). With regard to the parameters gender, age and duration of study, there were no significant differences among the 3 groups (?2 0.83). Besides the didactic and professional quality of the training, Iy also mentioned having had a higher practical orientation. They attained their aims more frequently, were better integrated in the health-care team and acquired more practical competences. Satisfaction with the practicum was evaluated as highest among the Iy. Discussion: Those students who could imagine taking an internship in gynaecology were seen to be more satisfied with their practica than those participants who declined or were undecided. The high proportion of females is an early indicator for a feminisation of the specialty. If necessary this could be countered with the help of nursing management.

Project description:IntroductionThe career intentions of medical students can exert influence on service provision and medical staffing in the health services. It is vital for a specialty's development and sustainability that it has a constant stream of trainees into it annually. An appreciation of how a specialty is viewed by medical students can be used as an opportunity for early intervention in order to improve perception of the specialty and reduce future workforce problems, such as retention and attrition within obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G). We aimed to analyse positive and negative factors of the specialty of O&G as perceived by medical students in order to gain insight into changes that need to be made to improve recruitment and retention into the specialty.MethodsA 70-item structured questionnaire consisting of demographic information and 5-point Likert scale questions relating to O&G was administered to final year medical students in the Republic of Ireland. Data were analysed with descriptive statistics, logistic regression, and odds ratios as appropriate.ResultsOf 195 medical students approached, 134 completed the questionnaire, a response rate of 68.7%. The majority were female (55.2%, n = 74) and 76.1% of respondents (n = 102) were Direct Entry Medicine students, with the remainder Graduate Entry Medicine students. 30.8% (n = 41) of students who responded scored 6 or more on a 10-point Likert scale when asked about their likelihood of considering a career in O&G. Students' clerkship experience factored heavily into their perception of the specialty and was more likely to be positive if they experienced direct consultant engagement and the opportunity for hands-on experience. Lifestyle factors, litigation and media were found to be deterrents to considering the specialty after graduation.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates the importance of good clerkship experience in fostering an interest amongst undergraduates in O&G. Educators and those working within the specialty should showcase the strengths of the specialty during undergraduate education, and work on ameliorating deterrents to ultimately provide a structured approach to improving recruitment into O&G.

Project description:Background and objectivesThe aim was to systematically review whether the reporting and analysis of trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations in the field of obstetrics and gynaecology comply with guidelines and recommendations, and whether this has improved over time.Data sources and selection criteriaA literature search was performed in MEDLINE, the NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) and the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database to identify trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations in obstetrics and gynaecology published between January 1, 2000 and May 16, 2017. Studies performed in middle- and low-income countries and studies related to prevention, midwifery, and reproduction were excluded.Data collection and analysisReporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standard (CHEERS) statement (a modified version with 21 items, as we focused on trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations) and the statistical quality was assessed using a literature-based list of criteria (8 items). Exploratory regression analyses were performed to assess the association between reporting and statistical quality scores and publication year.ResultsThe electronic search resulted in 5482 potentially eligible studies. Forty-five studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 22 in obstetrics and 23 in gynaecology. Twenty-seven (60%) studies did not adhere to 50% (n = 10) or more of the reporting quality items and 32 studies (71%) did not meet 50% (n = 4) or more of the statistical quality items. As for the statistical quality, no study used the appropriate method to assess cost differences, no advanced methods were used to deal with missing data, and clustering of data was ignored in all studies. No significant improvements over time were found in reporting or statistical quality in gynaecology, whereas in obstetrics a significant improvement in reporting and statistical quality was found over time.LimitationsThe focus of this review was on trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations in obstetrics and gynaecology, so further research is needed to explore whether results from this review are generalizable to other medical disciplines.Conclusions and implications of key findingsThe reporting and analysis of trial-based cost-effectiveness evaluations in gynaecology and obstetrics is generally poor. Since this can result in biased results, incorrect conclusions, and inappropriate healthcare decisions, there is an urgent need for improvement in the methods of cost-effectiveness evaluations in this field.

Dataset Information

Shaping the System - The DRG Evaluation Project of the German Society for Gynaecology and Obstetrics (Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Gynakologie und Geburtshilfe, DGGG).

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets