Discussion about these low volume ADRGs generalized to situations where no split was being proposed and there was a split in V7.0. In these cases, DTG agreed that the number of splits as in V7.0 should be maintained 9. Other issues 9. Other issues 9. Other issues 9. issues DCL Precision N/A DCL precision in relation The DCL matrix has After investigation of to N18.- and T31.- was been recalculated with initial candidate codes discussed at DTG. It was enhanced precision for identified for enhanced agreed that the DCLs N18.-. DCL precision in the should be recalculated Review of the AR-DRG with enhanced The low occurrence of Case Complexity Process precision (4th and 5th episodes with T31.- Report, ACCD proposed character level) for diagnosis codes meant that DCLs be these two conditions. that DCLs calculated at recalculated at the the 4th and 5th fourth and 5th character level were no character level for N18.- different from those Chronic Kidney Disease calculated at the 3 and T31.- Burns character level. classified according to Consequently, no extent of body surface enhanced DCL precision area involved was possible for the T31.- (see Section 2.4.2) DCL Standardisation N/A DTG discussed A minor modification to ACCD to investigate examples in which the the standardisation ways of increasing the ECCS values were too factor used in the DCL ability of ECCS to be clustered to allow formula was used as a splitting splitting on the basis of implemented allowing variable. ECCS viable ECCS splitting models to be derived for all ADRGs. (see Section 2.4.3)
Discussion about these low volume ADRGs generalized to situations where no split was being proposed and there was a split in V7.0. In these cases, DTG agreed that the number of splits as in V7.0 should be maintained 9. Other issues 9. Other issues 9. Other issues 9. issues DCL Precision After investigation of initial candidate codes identified for enhanced DCL precision in the Review of the AR-DRG Case Complexity Process Report, ACCD proposed that DCLs be recalculated at the fourth and 5th character level for N18.- Chronic Kidney Disease and T31.- Burns classified according to extent of body surface area involved N/A DCL precision in relation to N18.- and T31.- was discussed at DTG. It was agreed that the DCLs should be recalculated with enhanced precision (4th and 5th character level) for these two conditions. The DCL matrix has been recalculated with enhanced precision for N18.-. The low occurrence of episodes with T31.- diagnosis codes meant that DCLs calculated at the 4th and 5th character level were no different from those calculated at the 3 character level. Consequently, no enhanced DCL precision was possible for the T31.- (see Section 2.4.2) DCL Standardisation ACCD to investigate ways of increasing the ability of ECCS to be used as a splitting variable. N/A DTG discussed examples in which the ECCS values were too clustered to allow splitting on the basis of ECCS A minor modification to the standardisation factor used in the DCL formula was implemented allowing viable ECCS splitting models to be derived for all ADRGs. (see Section 2.4.3)
development_of_the_australian_refined_diagnosis_related_groups_v8.0_final_report_2.docx