Chia Nan University of Pharmacy & Science Institutional Repository:Item 310902800/22896
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 18074/20272 (89%)
Visitors : 4135969      Online Users : 7461
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ir.cnu.edu.tw/handle/310902800/22896


    Title: 醫師與疾病分類人員編碼一致性分析-以南部某醫學中心為例
    The Consistency Analysis of ICD-9-CM Coding between Physicians and Coders -An Example of A Southern Taiwan Medical Center
    Authors: 黃有毅
    Contributors: 張碩芳
    嘉南藥理科技大學:醫療資訊管理研究所
    Keywords: 醫師
    編碼一致性
    合併症/併發症
    診斷關聯群
    疾病分類人員
    Diagnosis related groups (DRGs)
    Comorbidity/Complication(C/C)
    coding consistency
    coder
    physicians
    Date: 2009
    Issue Date: 2010-06-09 09:17:13 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 為了抑制醫療費用上漲所帶來的問題,健保局即將於2009年9月全面實施台灣版DRG(Taiwan Diagnostic Related Group;TW-DRG)支付制度來取代論量計酬制。TW-DRG的實施會為醫院經營管理帶來重大的改變,疾病分類編碼將左右DRG分派,並影響醫院收入,更可能間接影響醫師薪酬。因此ICD-9-CM編碼不一致將可能導致醫師與疾病分類人員間之衝突,並產生巨額溝通成本。由於相關研究較少探討醫師與疾病分類人員編碼的一致性,因此本研究將探討醫師與疾病分類人員編碼(ICD-9-CM、DRG分派)一致性與否,及其影響編碼一致性之因素。以及未來DRGs實施後,編碼一致性與否對於申報費用等影響。
    本研究將分為兩階段,同時採用量性與質性的兩種方法來交互分析其結果。第一階段透過醫師與疾病分類人員在病患出院診斷之病歷個案做重複編碼,藉此探討醫生與疾病分類人員之間編碼結果是否達到一致,並分析其影響編碼一致性之因素。經由費雪精確檢定(Fisher's Exact test)、邏輯斯迴歸(Logistic Regression)等分析方法進行資料分析。第二階段研究為質性研究,以深入訪談和焦點群體法探討影響醫師與疾病分類人員編碼不一致之因素,並以內容分析法分析資料。
    研究結果發現,編碼一致性比例為17%,編碼不一致性高達83%,
    其中以合併症/併發症(C/C)與醫師接受疾病分類人員協助編碼、個人、疾病認知不同、專業領域之差異、病歷書寫品質等為影響編碼一致性之因素。另外,醫師申報之點數試算低於疾病分類人員。期望本研究結果在未來TW-DRGs全面實施時,可提供醫療院所及衛生行政相關單位因應之參考。
    Considering the continuous inflation of medical costs in Taiwan, the Diagnostic Related Group (DRG) was proposed to replace Fee For Service (FFS) in the reimbursement system since September 1, 2009. However, the accuracy and validity of the present medical coding system of DRG in Taiwan is still controversial The implementation of DRG will bring changes in hospital administration, so as the inconsistent perceptions of disease coding by physicians and coders. The coding results may influence hospital income and physician salary, and the inconsistent perceptions of disease coding may bring conflicts between physicians and coders. Since there is lack of rigorous studies concerning the consistency of ICD-9-CM coding between physicians and coders, this study intends to discuss the consistency between the re-coding code by physicians and the original code by coders.
    Two-phased study was conducted. A quantitative study involving the statistical differences analysis(Fisher's Exact test、Logistic Regression) was performed in the phase I study to explore the consistency of coding and its impact on DRGs. In the phase II study, in-depth interviews and focus groups with physicians and coders were be performed to explore the causes and effects of inconsistent coding. Content analysis was used to analyze the qualitative data.
    The results showed that the proportions of coding are 17% consistent and 83% inconsistent. The factors resulting in coding inconsistency include comorbidity/complication(c/c)、physicians accepting the assistance from coders、different perceptions of diseases, poor writing quality of medical records, and the odiversity of professionals. The study results expect to addresses comments to national public hygiene policy and hospital management when facing the implementation of DRGs.
    Relation: 校內外均一年後公開 ,學年度:97, 153 頁
    Appears in Collections:[Dept. of Hospital and Health (including master's program)] Dissertations and Theses

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML1793View/Open


    All items in CNU IR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback