Evaluating performance of local case-mix system by international comparison: A case study in Beijing, China

International Journal of Health Planning and Management

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 471-481

  Jian, Wei Yan ^a   Lu, Ming ^a   Cui, Tao ^a   Hu, Mu ^b  

^a PEKING UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER   (China)

^b PEKING UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

China; Diagnosis related groups; Health management tool; International comparison; Performance evaluation

Indexed keywords

DEVELOPING WORLD; HEALTH POLICY; IDENTIFICATION METHOD; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; WELFARE REFORM;

ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; CHINA; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUP; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL AUDIT; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; UNITED STATES;

AUSTRALIA; CHINA; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; DIAGNOSIS-RELATED GROUPS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE REFORM; HEALTH PLANNING; HUMANS; MALE; MEDICAL AUDIT; UNITED STATES;

BEIJING [CHINA]; CHINA;

EID: 84855246220     PISSN: 07496753     EISSN: 10991751     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hpm.1111     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Beijing DRGs Project Team (BDPT). 2009. The development of case-mix system in Beijing (2006-2009) BDPT Working paper; 30-32.
2. Beijing government. 2010. Deepening the Health Care System Reform in Beijing (2010-2011) (a draft for comments). Available at: [accessed 12 May 2010].
3. Beijing Public Health Information Center. 2007. The training of the coding of International Classification of Diseases. Available at: [accessed 13 May 2010].
4. Bureau of Statistic of Beijing. 2009a. Beijing Statistical Year Book. Available at: [accessed 1 June 2010].
5. Bureau of Statistic of Beijing. 2009b. Beijing Statistical Year Book. Available at: [accessed 1 June 2010].
6. Casas M, Tomas R. 1993. Producing DRG statistics at the European level. In Diagnosis-Related Groups in Europe: Uses and Perspectives, Casas M, Wiley MM (eds). Springer-Verlag: Berlin; 63-80.
7. Central Government of China. 2009. Opinions of the CPC Central Committee and the State Council on deepening the health care system reform. Available at: [accessed 10 May 2010].
8. Central Government of China. 2010. National conference on polite studies of clinical pathway. Available at: [accessed 12 Jan. 2010].
9. Commonwealth of Australia. 2002. Australian Refined Diagnosis Related Groups, Version 5. 0, Definitions Manual, Canberra.
10. Fetter R, Shin Y, Freeman J, Thompson J. 1980, Case mix definition by diagnosis related groups. Med Care 18(2): 1-53.
11. Freeman JL. 1991. Refined DRGs: trials in Europe. Health Policy 17: 151-164.
12. Gong ZP, Duckett SJ, Legge DG, Pei LK. 2004. Describing Chinese hospital activity with diagnosis related groups (DRGs). A case study in Chengdu. Health Policy 69: 93-100.
13. Huang H. 1994. Feasibility of applying DRGs in Beijing hospital management. Chin J Hosp Admin 10(3): 131-136 (In Chinese).
14. Jian W, Huang Y, Hu M, Zhang X. 2009. Performance evaluation of inpatient service in Beijing: a horizontal comparison with risk adjustment based on Diagnosis Related Groups. BMC Health Serv Res 9: 72. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-9-72. Available at: [accessed 5 Jul. 2009].
15. Li WP, Yuan YZ, Liu N. 2005. Analyzing the governance structure of F hospital. Health Econ Res 6: 3-8 (In Chinese).
16. Nilsson CA, Carling K, Erlo CK, Myren KJ, Hakansson S. 1998. ADRG, DRG or RDRG{Eth} which system is best? Proceedings Manual, Patient Classification Systems/Europe. 14th International Working Conference, Mancester, UK: PCS/E; 179-184.
17. Palmer G, Reid B. 2001. Evaluation of the performance of diagnosis-related groups and similar casemix systems: methodological issues. Health Serv Manage Res 14: 71-81.
18. Palmer G, Reid B, Aisbett C, Fields S, Kearns D, Fetter R. 1997. Evaluating the Performance of the Australian National Diagnosis Related Groups. The Centre for Hospital Management and Information Systems Research, University of New South Wales: Sydney.
19. Reid B, Sutch S. 2008. Comparing diagnosis-related group systems to identify design improvements. Health Policy 87: 82-91.
20. Roger France FH. 2003. Case mix use in 25 countries: a migration success but international comparisons failure. Int J Med Inform 70: 215-219.
21. Trombert-Paviot B, Rush P, Mennerat F, Rodrigues JM. 1994. Quality assurance diagram, quality of casemix classification and quality of database: public and private hospitals French data bases. Patient Classification Systems Europe. Proceedings of the 10th International Working Conference, Budapest: PCS/E; 37-46.
22. Wynn BO, Scott M. 2007. Evaluation of severity-adjusted DRG Systems: addendum to the interim report. RAND working paper. Available at: [accessed 17 May 2010].