eISSN: 3023-6940
  • Home
  • Examining urogenital cancers in Turkey within the diagnosis related grouping data warehouse

Review

Examining urogenital cancers in Turkey within the diagnosis related grouping data warehouse


1 İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Üroloji Anabilim Dalı, İstanbul

2 İstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Fakültesi, Sağlık Yönetimi Bölümü, İstanbul

3 Sağlık Bakanlığı, Ankara


DOI :
New J Urol. 2013; 8 (2): 72-78

Abstract

Ojective: After a short period of pilo-ting experience, Diagnosed Related Grou-ping (DRG) has been used in the Ministry of Health hospitals since 2011 which provi-ded a comprehensive data wharehause. This study aims to make qualitative and quantita-tive evaluation of patent groups in the field of urology and especially those with genito-urinary cancer in the DRG data of one year.

Materials and Methods:The data of in-patients and outpatients treated in 2011 in training and state hospitals run by Ministry of Health was the main source of the study population. One-year DRG data was used to analyze the cases treated for urological disea-ses, and especially those with urogenital can-cer. Medical and surgical interventions du-ring the treatment of these patient groups were determined, and gender distribution, age, duration of bed occuption were com-pared. Additionally,  workload of canser ca-ses were compared with other patient groups using DRG frequencies and corresponding relative values.

Results: The total number of outpati-ent urology cases  in training and state hos-pitals was 6.198.911  (2.61 %) and inpati-ent 397,127 (5.27 %). No cancer was recor-ded among the ten most frequent DRG gro-ups. Urogenital cancers constituted 9.59 % of general cancer cases.  60.07 % of urogenital cancers (14,154) were urinary system can-cers, whereas 39.93 % of them were urogeni tal cancers. Only 14.4 % of these patients underwent surgical in-tervention. When compared by using relative values, the surgi-cal and medical interventions were found to have equal weight. 

Conclusion: Besides being used as a finansement model in the reimbursement of health services, DRG data provides an  imporant  tool for  decision support systems by giving oppor-tunity to analyse comparable patient groups, spesific bed requi-rements, source consumption during tretment and other  simi-lar parameters. In addition to urogenital cancers, such reliable data will enable us to develop national policies for various diag-nostic groups.

Key Words:  Diagnosis-Related Groups, Urogenital Cancer.


Abstract

Ojective: After a short period of pilo-ting experience, Diagnosed Related Grou-ping (DRG) has been used in the Ministry of Health hospitals since 2011 which provi-ded a comprehensive data wharehause. This study aims to make qualitative and quantita-tive evaluation of patent groups in the field of urology and especially those with genito-urinary cancer in the DRG data of one year.

Materials and Methods:The data of in-patients and outpatients treated in 2011 in training and state hospitals run by Ministry of Health was the main source of the study population. One-year DRG data was used to analyze the cases treated for urological disea-ses, and especially those with urogenital can-cer. Medical and surgical interventions du-ring the treatment of these patient groups were determined, and gender distribution, age, duration of bed occuption were com-pared. Additionally,  workload of canser ca-ses were compared with other patient groups using DRG frequencies and corresponding relative values.

Results: The total number of outpati-ent urology cases  in training and state hos-pitals was 6.198.911  (2.61 %) and inpati-ent 397,127 (5.27 %). No cancer was recor-ded among the ten most frequent DRG gro-ups. Urogenital cancers constituted 9.59 % of general cancer cases.  60.07 % of urogenital cancers (14,154) were urinary system can-cers, whereas 39.93 % of them were urogeni tal cancers. Only 14.4 % of these patients underwent surgical in-tervention. When compared by using relative values, the surgi-cal and medical interventions were found to have equal weight. 

Conclusion: Besides being used as a finansement model in the reimbursement of health services, DRG data provides an  imporant  tool for  decision support systems by giving oppor-tunity to analyse comparable patient groups, spesific bed requi-rements, source consumption during tretment and other  simi-lar parameters. In addition to urogenital cancers, such reliable data will enable us to develop national policies for various diag-nostic groups.

Key Words:  Diagnosis-Related Groups, Urogenital Cancer.

Resources