Assessing DRG cost accounting with respect to resource allocation and tariff calculation: the case of Germany

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the German diagnosis related groups (G-DRG) cost accounting scheme by assessing its resource allocation at hospital level and its tariff calculation at national level. First, the paper reviews and assesses the three steps in the G-DRG resource allocation scheme at hospital level: (1) the groundwork; (2) cost-center accounting; and (3) patient-level costing. Second, the paper reviews and assesses the three steps in G-DRG national tariff calculation: (1) plausibility checks; (2) inlier calculation; and (3) the “one hospital” approach. The assessment is based on the two main goals of G-DRG introduction: improving transparency and efficiency. A further empirical assessment attests high costing quality. The G-DRG cost accounting scheme shows high system quality in resource allocation at hospital level, with limitations concerning a managerially relevant full cost approach and limitations in terms of advanced activity-based costing at patient-level. However, the scheme has serious flaws in national tariff calculation: inlier calculation is normative, and the “one hospital” model causes cost bias, adjustment and representativeness issues. The G-DRG system was designed for reimbursement calculation, but developed to a standard with strategic management implications, generalized by the idea of adapting a hospital’s cost structures to DRG revenues. This combination causes problems in actual hospital financing, although resource allocation is advanced at hospital level.

Inpatient Treatment for Severe Nonsurgical Dermatological Disorders: Prevalence, Care Infrastructure and Reimbursement in Switzerland

“…The cost homogeneity coefficient (CH) for a DRG was calculated according to the formula CH = 1/(1 + σ/μ), where σ = SD and μ = arithmetic mean [9]. …”

Economic Constraints - the Growing Challenge for Western Breast Cancer Centers

“…Wiegard et al [22] underline that health-related quality of live in relation to breast cancer treatment is determined essentially by a patient's psychological state. Not implemented in the previous definition of DRG-based reimbursement per case, an increasing amount of non-DRG-relevant costs arise for instance from ambulatory care, research and teaching, psychological, psychiatric and psycho-oncological care, as well as amortizations [23]. In principle, the need for a service portfolio of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is underscored by the study of Matsuno [24] on breast cancer survivors who reported that they perceived CAM therapies as helpful.…”

Cost–benefit analysis of Xpert MTB/RIF for tuberculosis suspects in German hospitals

“…In most cases, these fall below the average daily reimbursement for the first 14 days. Accordingly, for TB patients under statutory health insurance, hospitals do well to keep the total number of patients treated high, but to keep the duration of their hospital stays as short as possible [5,6].…”