Reimbursement for reconstruction by tissue transfer–a European comparison

BMC Health Services Research

Sebastian Hoefert¹  Hans-Eberhard Schaller²  Philipp Gonser²  William Arthur Townley³  Oliver Lotter² 

[1] Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Eberhard-Karls-University, Schnarrenbergstrasse 95, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany;Clinic for Plastic, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, Burn and Trauma Center, Eberhard-Karls-University, Schnarrenbergstrasse 95, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany;Plastic Surgery Department, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford OX3 8DU, UK

关键词: Health services research;    Health care policy;    Diagnosis-Related Groups;    Reimbursement;    Flaps;    Tissue transfer;   

Others  :  1126234
DOI  :  10.1186/1472-6963-14-427

 received in 2012-08-11, accepted in 2014-08-14,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Case payment mechanisms have become the principal means of remunerating hospitals in most developed countries. Our purpose was to analyse the reimbursement for different types of tissue transfer in five European countries.

Methods

We looked at common surgical options for pedicled and free flaps. The recipient site of a flap and the principal diagnosis were systematically modified and processed with national grouper software in order to identify Diagnosis-Related Groups from which the proceeds were derived. The primary data originated from the database of the German Institute for the Hospital Remuneration System as aggregate information. We conducted eight specialist interviews to transfer the available data into clinical practice. Data of real patients were not available and we rather simulated standard patients to avoid dilution of results.

Results

Altogether, payment for pedicled flaps averaged 5933€ and was 8517€ for free flaps. The comparison of both flap types within a country revealed significant differences in Germany, Austria and Sweden only (p < 0.001). Italy has the highest mean proceeds for pedicled flaps, followed by Sweden, Germany, Austria and the UK. This relationship changes for free flaps with Sweden achieving the highest payments. Overall, reimbursement conformity is higher for free flaps.

Conclusions

Most countries have procedure-driven payment systems for flap surgery, which additionally can strongly depend on the diagnosis. Nevertheless the latter does not always justify existing price differences. For the first time, clinical cases in tissue transfer were compared internationally. In today`s dynamic world of health care, we should observe other countries` compensation systems to identify ways of improving our own.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Lotter et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Fetter R: Case-Mix Definition by Diagnosis-Related Groups. Med Care Rev 1980, 18:1-53.
• [2]Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: List of OECD Member countries. [http://www.oecd.org/document/58/0,3746,en_2649_201185_1889402_1_1_1_1,00.html webcite]
• [3]Serafin D, Georgiade NG, Smith DH: Comparison of free flaps with pedicled flaps for coverage of defects of the leg or foot. Plast Reconstr Surg 1970, 59:492-499.
• [4]Pearl RM: An economic analysis of health care reform and its implications for plastic surgery: a five-year perspective. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003, 111:483-484.
• [5]Institut für das Entgeltsystem im Krankenhaus: G-DRG-System. 2012. [http://www.g-drg.de/cms webcite]
• [6]ID Diacos Berlin: Online Grouper. 2012. [http://www.clinical-coding.eu/app/Webgrouper webcite]
• [7]Bundesministerium für Gesundheit (Federal Department of Health of Austria): Programme für landesgesundheitsfondsfinanzierte Krankenanstalten. [http://www.bmg.gv.at/cms/site/standard.html?channel=CH0719&doc=CMS1159519039440 webcite]
• [8]Fondazione Medtronic Italia: Software per la simulazione online die DRG. [http://www.e-drg.it webcite]
• [9]The Information Center for Health and Social Care: HRG4 2012/13 Local Payment Grouper. [http://www.ic.nhs.uk/services/the-casemix-service/using-this-service/reference/downloads/payment/hrg4-2012-13-local-payment-grouper webcite]
• [10]DRG System Development AB Sweden: Grouper 2012. [http://www.drgsystem.se webcite]
• [11]European Central Bank: Statistical Data Warehouse. [http://sdw.ecb.europa.eu/home.do webcite]
• [12]Statistisches Bundesamt Deutschland (German Federal Office of Statistics): Verbrauchergeldparitäten (Purchasing Power Parities). [http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Content/Statistiken/Preise/InternationalerVergleich/Content75/Verbrauchergeldparitaeten,templateId=renderPrint.psml webcite]
• [13]Internationaler Vergleich der Verbraucherpreise (International comparison of consumer prices). [https://www.destatis.de/csp/shop/sfg/bpm.html.cms.cBroker.cls?cmspath=struktur,vollanzeige.csp&ID=1025270 webcite]
• [14]Lotter O, Amr A, Jaminet P, Hoefert S, Schaller HE, Stahl S: Development of DRGs in reconstructive breast surgery. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir 2012, 44:112-127.
• [15]Talesnik A, Markowitz B, Calcaterra T, Ahn C, Shaw W: Cost and outcome of osteocutaneous free-tissue transfer versus pedicledd soft-tissue reconstruction for composite mandibular defects. Plast Reconstr Surg 1996, 97:1167-1178.
• [16]Smeele LE, Goldstein D, Tsai V, Gullane PJ, Neligan P, Brown DH: Morbidity and cost differences between free flap reconstruction and pedicledd flap reconstruction in oral and oropharyngeal cancer: Matched control study. J Otolaryngol 2006, 35:102-107.
• [17]Kroll SS, Evans GR, Goldberg D, Wang BG, Reece GP: A comparison of resource costs for head and neck reconstruction with free and pectoralis major flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997, 99:1282-1286.
• [18]Tsue TT, Desyatnikova SS, Deleyiannis FW, Futran ND, Stack BC, Weymuller EA: Comparison of cost and function in reconstruction of the posterior oral cavity and oropharynx. Free vs pedicled soft tissue transfer. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1997, 123:731-737.
• [19]Thoma A, Veltri K, Archibald S, Jackson S, Young JE: Microsurgical reconstruction of the through-and-through defect in head and neck cancer: is it worth it? J Reconstr Microsurg 1999, 15:401-408.
• [20]Funk GF, Hoffman HT, Karnell LH, Ricks JM, Zimmerman MB, Corbae DP: Cost-identification analysis in oral cavity cancer management. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 1998, 118:211-220.
• [21]Arnold DJ, Funk GF, Karnell LH, Chen AH, Hoffman HAT: Laryngeal cancer cost analysis: association of casemix and treatment characteristics with medical charges. Laryngoscope 2000, 110:1-7.
• [22]McCrory AL, Magnuson JS: Free tissue transfer versus pedicled flap in head and neck reconstruction. Laryngoscope 2002, 112:2161-2165.
• [23]De Bree R, Reith R, Quak JJ, Uyl-de Groot CA, van Agthoven M, Leemans CR: Free radial forearm flap versus pectoralis major myocutaneous flap reconstruction of oral and oropharyngeal defects: a cost analysis. Clin Otolaryngol 2007, 32:275-582.
• [24]Katsaros J, Tan E, Robinson DN: Cost-effectiveness of free tissue transfer. Aust N Z J Surg 1988, 58:373-376.
• [25]Brown MR, McCulloch TM, Funk GF, Graham SM, Hoffman HT: Resource utilization and patient morbidity in head and neck reconstruction. Laryngoscope 1997, 107:1028-1031.
• [26]Smith DH, Adams JR, Johnston SR, Gordon A, Drummond MF, Bennett CL: A comparative economic analysis of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin versus topotecan in ovarian cancer in the USA and the UK. Ann Oncol 2002, 13:1590-1597.
• [27]Bennett CL, Armitage JL, LeSage S, Gulati SC, Armitage JO, Gorin NC: Economic analyses of clinical trials in cancer: are they helpful to policy makers? Stem Cells 1994, 12:424-429.
• [28]Schulman K, Burke J, Drummond M, Davies L, Carlsson P, Gruger J: Resource costing for multinational neurologic clinical trials: methods and results. Health Econ 1998, 7:629-638.
• [29]Townley WA, Urbanska C, Dunn RLR, Khan U: Costs and coding – Free-flap reconstruction in lower-limb trauma. Injury, Int J Care Injured 2011, 42:381-384.
• [30]Tong WM, Bazakas A, Hultman CS, Halvorson EG: The transition from pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous to perforator flap: what is the cost of opportunity? Ann Plast Surg 2012, 68:489-494.
• [31]Deleyiannis FW, Porter AC: Economic factors affecting head and neck reconstructive microsurgery: the surgeons' and hospital's perspective. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007, 120:157-165.
• [32]Kezirian EJ, Yueh B: Accuracy of terminology and methodology in economic analyses in otolaryngology. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2001, 124:496-502.
• [33]Vera A: The Industrialisation of the hospital sector by DRG-based prospective payment systems – an interdisciplinary analysis. Gesundheitswesen 2009, 71:10-17.