IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

How Well Do Diagnosis‐Related Groups For Appendectomy Explain Variations In Resource Use? An Analysis Of Patient‐Level Data From 10 European Countries

Listed author(s):
  • Reinhard Busse
  • Alexander Geissler
  • Anne Mason
  • Zeynep Or
  • David Scheller‐Kreinsen
  • Andrew Street
  • Anne Mason
  • Zeynep Or
  • Thomas Renaud
  • Andrew Street
  • Josselin Thuilliez
  • Padraic Ward

Appendectomy is a common and relatively simple procedure to remove an inflamed appendix, but the rate of appendectomy varies widely across Europe. This paper investigates factors that explain differences in resource use for appendectomy. We analysed 106 929 appendectomy patients treated in 939 hospitals in 10 European countries. In stage 1, we tested the performance of three models in explaining variation in the (log of) cost of the inpatient stay (seven countries) or length of stay (three countries). The first model used only the diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) to which patients were coded, the second model used a core set of general patient-level and appendectomy-specific variables, and the third model combined both sets of variables. In stage two, we investigated hospital-level variation. In classifying appendectomy patients, most DRG systems take account of complex diagnoses and comorbidities but use different numbers of DRGs (range: 2 to 8). The capacity of DRGs and patient-level variables to explain patient-level cost variation ranges from 34% in Spain to over 60% in England and France. All DRG systems can make better use of administrative data such as the patient's age, diagnoses and procedures, and all countries have outlying hospitals that could improve their management of resources for appendectomy.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Article provided by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. in its journal Health Economics.

Volume (Year): 21 (2012)
Issue (Month): (August)
Pages: 30-40

in new window

Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:21:y:2012:i::p:30-40
Contact details of provider: Web page:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:21:y:2012:i::p:30-40. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.