Cited by 138Healthcare Systems and ReformsHealthcare Policy and ManagementHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life

Review of Diagnosis-Related Group-Based Financing of Hospital Care

Open access
Mihailovic, Natasa, Kocic, Sanja, Jakovljevic, Mihajlo·2016·Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology

Abstract

Since the 1990s, diagnosis-related group (DRG)-based payment systems were gradually introduced in many countries. The main design characteristics of a DRG-based payment system are an exhaustive patient case classification system (ie, the system of diagnosis-related groupings) and the payment formula, which is based on the base rate multiplied by a relative cost weight specific for each DRG. Cases within the same DRG code group are expected to undergo similar clinical evolution. Consecutively, they should incur the costs of diagnostics and treatment within a predefined scale. Such predictability was proven in a number of cost-of-illness studies conducted on major prosperity diseases alongside clinical trials on efficiency. This was the case with risky pregnancies, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, depression, alcohol addiction, hepatitis, and cancer. This article presents experience of introduced DRG-based payments in countries of western and eastern Europe, Scandinavia, United States, Canada, and Australia. This article presents the results of few selected reviews and systematic reviews of the following evidence: published reports on health system reforms by World Health Organization, World Bank, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Canadian Institute for Health Information, Canadian Health Services Research Foundation, and Centre for Health Economics University of York. Diverse payment systems have different strengths and weaknesses in relation to the various objectives. The advantages of the DRG payment system are reflected in the increased efficiency and transparency and reduced average length of stay. The disadvantage of DRG is creating financial incentives toward earlier hospital discharges. Occasionally, such polices are not in full accordance with the clinical benefit priorities.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/2333392816647892

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The DRG payment system has become a significant component of healthcare payments in many countries to promote risk-sharing between healthcare providers and payers.

    “The payment system based on diagnosis-related groups, or DRGs, was designed to manage healthcare costs and maintain sustainable operations for inpatients and it has become a significant component of healthcare payments in many countries to promote risk-sharing between healthcare providers and payers1,2.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 54 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [18]Dagovic A Matter Walstra K Gutzwiller SF, et al. Resource use and costs of newly diagnosed cancer initial medical care. Eur J Oncol. 2014; 19(3): 166– 184.
  2. [29]WHO Regional Office for Europe. Health Systems in Transition Germany Health System Review European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies 2014.
  3. [45]Cylus J Irwin R The challenges of hospital payment systems. Euro Observer. 2010; 12(3): 1– 12.
  4. [49]Healy J Sharman E Lokuge B. Australia: health system in review. Health Sys Trans. 2006; 8(5): 1– 158.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mihailovic, N., Kocic, S., & Jakovljevic, M.
Affiliations
  • Institute for Public Health Kragujevac, Kragujevac, Serbia
  • University of Kragujevac (RS)
  • Health Economics and Pharmacoeconomics, The Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Kragujevac, Kragujevac, Serbia
Venue
Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology
Published
2016-01-01
Volume
3
Pages
2333392816647892-2333392816647892
ISSN
2333-3928 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2384835045
Cited by
138
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2
FWCI
12.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Healthcare Systems and Reforms
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Keywords
diagnosis-related groups, hospital reimbursement, prospective payment system, case classification, health care reform, length of hospital stay, hospital discharge timing, financial incentives, economic burden

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review