This publication describes Version 2 of the Clinical Classifications for Health Policy Research (CCHPR), a diagnosis and procedure categorization scheme, and provides descriptive statistics for 1992 hospital inpatient stays illustrating the use of the CCHPR categories.
Clinical Classifications for Health Policy Research (CCHPR) Version 2 provides a way to classify diagnoses and procedures into a limited number of categories. CCHPR aggregates individual hospital stays into larger diagnosic and procedure groups for statistical analysis and reporting.
Clinical Classifications for Health Policy Research (CCHPR) Version 2 provides a way to classify diagnoses and procedures into a limited number of categories. CCHPR aggregates individual hospital stays into larger diagnosic and procedure groups for statistical analysis and reporting.
This User’s Guide is intended to support the design, implementation, analysis, interpretation, and quality evaluation of registries created to increase understanding of patient outcomes. For the purposes of this guide, a patient registry is an organized system that uses observational study methods to collect uniform data (clinical and other) to evaluate specified outcomes for a population defined by a particular disease, condition, or exposure, and that serves one or more predetermined scientific, clinical, or policy purposes. A registry database is a file (or files) derived from the registry. Although registries can serve many purposes, this guide focuses on registries created for one or more of the following purposes: to describe the natural history of disease, to determine clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of health care products and services, to measure or monitor safety and harm, and/or to measure quality of care. Registries are classified according to how their populations are defined. For example, product registries include patients who have been exposed to biopharmaceutical products or medical devices. Health services registries consist of patients who have had a common procedure, clinical encounter, or hospitalization. Disease or condition registries are defined by patients having the same diagnosis, such as cystic fibrosis or heart failure. The User’s Guide was created by researchers affiliated with AHRQ’s Effective Health Care Program, particularly those who participated in AHRQ’s DEcIDE (Developing Evidence to Inform Decisions About Effectiveness) program. Chapters were subject to multiple internal and external independent reviews.
Many Americans believe that people who lack health insurance somehow get the care they really need. Care Without Coverage examines the real consequences for adults who lack health insurance. The study presents findings in the areas of prevention and screening, cancer, chronic illness, hospital-based care, and general health status. The committee looked at the consequences of being uninsured for people suffering from cancer, diabetes, HIV infection and AIDS, heart and kidney disease, mental illness, traumatic injuries, and heart attacks. It focused on the roughly 30 million-one in seven-working-age Americans without health insurance. This group does not include the population over 65 that is covered by Medicare or the nearly 10 million children who are uninsured in this country. The main findings of the report are that working-age Americans without health insurance are more likely to receive too little medical care and receive it too late; be sicker and die sooner; and receive poorer care when they are in the hospital, even for acute situations like a motor vehicle crash.
This volume, developed by the Observatory together with OECD, provides an overall conceptual framework for understanding and applying strategies aimed at improving quality of care. Crucially, it summarizes available evidence on different quality strategies and provides recommendations for their implementation. This book is intended to help policy-makers to understand concepts of quality and to support them to evaluate single strategies and combinations of strategies.
In the realm of health care, privacy protections are needed to preserve patients' dignity and prevent possible harms. Ten years ago, to address these concerns as well as set guidelines for ethical health research, Congress called for a set of federal standards now known as the HIPAA Privacy Rule. In its 2009 report, Beyond the HIPAA Privacy Rule: Enhancing Privacy, Improving Health Through Research, the Institute of Medicine's Committee on Health Research and the Privacy of Health Information concludes that the HIPAA Privacy Rule does not protect privacy as well as it should, and that it impedes important health research.
This book examines how nine different health systems--U.S. Medicare, Australia, Thailand, Kyrgyz Republic, Germany, Estonia, Croatia, China (Beijing) and the Russian Federation--have transitioned to using case-based payments, and especially diagnosis-related groups (DRGs), as part of their provider payment mix for hospital care. It sheds light on why particular technical design choices were made, what enabling investments were pertinent, and what broader political and institutional issues needed to be considered. The strategies used to phase in DRG payment receive special attention. These nine systems have been selected because they represent a variety of different approaches and experiences in DRG transition. They include the innovators who pioneered DRG payment systems (namely the United States and Australia), mature systems (such as Thailand, Germany, and Estonia), and countries where DRG payments were only introduced within the past decade (such as the Russian Federation and China). Each system is examined in detail as a separate case study, with a synthesis distilling the cross-cutting lessons learned. This book should be helpful to those working on health systems that are considering introducing, or are in the early stages of introducing, DRG-based payments into their provider payment mix. It will enhance the reader's understanding of how other countries (or systems) have made that transition, give a sense of the decisions that lie ahead, and offer options that can be considered. It will also be useful to those working in health systems that already include DRG payments in the payment mix but have not yet achieved the anticipated results.