IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Australian diagnosis related groups: Drivers of complexity adjustment


  • Jackson, Terri
  • Dimitropoulos, Vera
  • Madden, Richard
  • Gillett, Steve


In undertaking a major revision to the Australian Refined Diagnosis Related Group (ARDRG) classification, we set out to contrast Australia's approach to using data on additional (not principal) diagnoses with major international approaches in splitting base or Adjacent Diagnosis Related Groups (ADRGs).

Suggested Citation

  • Jackson, Terri & Dimitropoulos, Vera & Madden, Richard & Gillett, Steve, 2015. "Australian diagnosis related groups: Drivers of complexity adjustment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(11), pages 1433-1441.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:119:y:2015:i:11:p:1433-1441
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.09.011

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Horn, S.D. & Sharkey, P.D. & Chambers, A.F. & Horn, R.A., 1985. "Severity of illness within DRGs: Impact on prospective payment," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 75(10), pages 1195-1199.
    2. Conrad Kobel & Josselin Thuilliez & Martine Bellanger & Karl-Peter Pfeiffer, 2011. "DRG systems and similar patient classification systems in Europe," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00643049, HAL.
    3. Serden, Lisbeth & Lindqvist, Rikard & Rosen, Mans, 2003. "Have DRG-based prospective payment systems influenced the number of secondary diagnoses in health care administrative data?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 101-107, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Francesca Roda & Maurizio Agosti & Andrea Merlo & Maurizio Maini & Francesco Lombardi & Claudio Tedeschi & Maria Grazia Benedetti & Nino Basaglia & Mara Contini & Domenico Nicolotti & Rodolfo Brianti , 2017. "Psychometric validation of the Italian Rehabilitation Complexity Scale-Extended version 13," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(10), pages 1-15, October.
    2. Meng, Zhaolin & Hui, Wen & Cai, Yuanyi & Liu, Jiazhou & Wu, Huazhang, 2020. "The effects of DRGs-based payment compared with cost-based payment on inpatient healthcare utilization: A systematic review and meta-analysis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(4), pages 359-367.
    3. Dimitropoulos, Vera & Yeend, Trent & Zhou, Qingsheng & McAlister, Stuart & Navakatikyan, Michael & Hoyle, Philip & Pilla, John & Loggie, Carol & Elsworthy, Anne & Marshall, Ric & Madden, Richard, 2019. "A new clinical complexity model for the Australian Refined Diagnosis Related Groups," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(11), pages 1049-1052.
    4. Camilleri, Carl & Jofre-Bonet, Mireia & Serra-Sastre, Victoria, 2018. "The suitability of a DRG casemix system in the Maltese hospital setting," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(11), pages 1183-1189.
    5. Hellsten, Erik & Chu, Scally & Crump, R. Trafford & Yu, Kevin & Sutherland, Jason M., 2016. "New pricing approaches for bundled payments: Leveraging clinical standards and regional variations to target avoidable utilization," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(3), pages 316-326.


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:119:y:2015:i:11:p:1433-1441. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Haili He) or (). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.