[Measurement of Quality with Routine Data]. / Qualitätsmessung aus Routinedaten.

There is a growing interest in quality measurement in the healthcare sector. Hospitals in Germany are obligated to participate in measures for external quality assurance and they must establish an internal quality management system. In addition to the legal requirements, measurement of quality is also possible with routine data. Suitable sources are the ICD system or unstandardized information from treatment documentation. The selection of suitable quality indicators is necessary to interpret the data. Complications or achievement of surgical objectives can be suitable quality indicators. Analysis of procedures or the assessment of waiting time are also possible indicators. Our first data concerning waiting time show that with increasing use of an electronic patient guidance system, the waiting time decreased in our outpatient department. Assessment of quality indicators from routine data enables a continuous measurement of quality over a long period. Measures to increase quality can easily be checked. Routine data also provide the possibility to participate in a public reporting of quality indicators.

La adopción de la normativa de codificación CIE-10-ES o cómo hacer de la necesidad virtud / The adoption of the ICD-10-ES codification rules or how to make of necessity a virtue

No disponible

Medicare Program: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment and Ambulatory Surgical Center Payment Systems and Quality Reporting Programs; Organ Procurement Organization Reporting and Communication; Transplant Outcome Measures and Documentation Requirements; Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Programs; Payment to Nonexcepted Off-Campus Provider-Based Department of a Hospital; Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program; Establishment of Payment Rates Under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule for Nonexcepted Items and Services Furnished by an Off-Campus Provider-Based Department of a Hospital. Final rule with comment period and interim final rule with comment period.

This final rule with comment period revises the Medicare hospital outpatient prospective payment system (OPPS) and the Medicare ambulatory surgical center (ASC) payment system for CY 2017 to implement applicable statutory requirements and changes arising from our continuing experience with these systems. In this final rule with comment period, we describe the changes to the amounts and factors used to determine the payment rates for Medicare services paid under the OPPS and those paid under the ASC payment system. In addition, this final rule with comment period updates and refines the requirements for the Hospital Outpatient Quality Reporting (OQR) Program and the ASC Quality Reporting (ASCQR) Program. Further, in this final rule with comment period, we are making changes to tolerance thresholds for clinical outcomes for solid organ transplant programs; to Organ Procurement Organizations (OPOs) definitions, outcome measures, and organ transport documentation; and to the Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record Incentive Programs. We also are removing the HCAHPS Pain Management dimension from the Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program. In addition, we are implementing section 603 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 relating to payment for certain items and services furnished by certain off-campus provider-based departments of a provider. In this document, we also are issuing an interim final rule with comment period to establish the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule payment rates for the nonexcepted items and services billed by a nonexcepted off-campus provider-based department of a hospital in accordance with the provisions of section 603.

El trastorno de Tourette a lo largo de la historia / Tourette’s disorder in history

El término trastorno de Tourette emerge en el campo de la psiquiatría con la aparición de la tercera edición del Manual Diagnóstico y Estadístico de Trastornos Mentales (DSM-III) en el año 1980. Sin embargo, el hecho de que se consensuaran sus criterios diagnósticos por el grupo de expertos responsable de la elaboración de dicha versión del DSM no implica que previamente no existieran múltiples referencias a su sintomatología. El objetivo de este trabajo es recoger aportaciones de la historia de la neurología y de la psiquiatría que permitan comprender cómo se ha ido configurando el concepto operativo de trastorno de Tourette tal como es aceptado en la actualidad por una gran parte de la comunidad científica. En la última década, merced a los estudios de asociación de todo el genoma, se han producido importantes avances en la identificación de variantes comunes y variantes raras implicadas en la etiología del trastorno de Tourette. La conclusión más relevante que se desprende de esta revisión es poner al descubierto la crisis del modelo categórico kraepeliniano del trastorno (AU)

The term Tourette’s disorder emerged in the field of psychiatry with the appearance of the third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III) in 1980. However, the fact that some diagnostic criteria were agreed by the expert group responsible for the development of this version of the DSM diagnostic criteria does not mean that multiple references to the symptoms of the disorder did not previously exist. The aim of this review is to collect contributions from the history of neurology and psychiatry which allow us to understand how the operating concept of Tourette’s disorder has been progressively shaped as it is currently accepted by the scientific community. In the last decade, thanks to studies of genome association, major advances have arisen in identifying common variants and rare variants involved in the etiology of Tourette’s disorder. The most important conclusion of this review is the disclosure of the crisis of the Kraepelinian categorical model of the disorder (AU)

[For discussion: Quality assurance in medical care - is PKMS the right way to go?]. / Zur Diskussion: Qualitätssicherung in der Pflege - mit PKMS auf dem richtigen Weg?

Hospitals are legally obliged to take part in external comparative quality assurance programs. Quality indicators for pressure ulcer prevention are among the most widely used for geriatric clinical institutions. To enable more precise risk adjustment established risk factors are employed in conjunction with the OPS 9-200. Using a PKMS case to produce an OPS 9-200 is far too heterogeneous, sketchy and vague to create an accurate and satisfactory pressure ulcer risk assessment for patients with varied and individual case factors. Therefore we propose to include risk factors which, according to experts, are clearly and specifically related to pressure ulcers (e.g. immobility and incontinence) and matched by unique ICD codes.

Medicare and Medicaid Programs; CY 2016 Home Health Prospective Payment System Rate Update; Home Health Value-Based Purchasing Model; and Home Health Quality Reporting Requirements. Final rule.

This final rule will update Home Health Prospective Payment System (HH PPS) rates, including the national, standardized 60-day episode payment rates, the national per-visit rates, and the non-routine medical supply (NRS) conversion factor under the Medicare prospective payment system for home health agencies (HHAs), effective for episodes ending on or after January 1, 2016. As required by the Affordable Care Act, this rule implements the 3rd year of the 4-year phase-in of the rebasing adjustments to the HH PPS payment rates. This rule updates the HH PPS case-mix weights using the most current, complete data available at the time of rulemaking and provides a clarification regarding the use of the "initial encounter'' seventh character applicable to certain ICD-10-CM code categories. This final rule will also finalize reductions to the national, standardized 60-day episode payment rate in CY 2016, CY 2017, and CY 2018 of 0.97 percent in each year to account for estimated case-mix growth unrelated to increases in patient acuity (nominal case-mix growth) between CY 2012 and CY 2014. In addition, this rule implements a HH value-based purchasing (HHVBP) model, beginning January 1, 2016, in which all Medicare-certified HHAs in selected states will be required to participate. Finally, this rule finalizes minor changes to the home health quality reporting program and minor technical regulations text changes.

Health Policy Basics: Implementation of the International Classification of Disease, 10th Revision.

The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) standardizes diagnostic codes into meaningful criteria to enable the storage and retrieval of information regarding patient care. Whereas other countries have been using ICD, 10th Revision (ICD-10), for years, the United States will transition from ICD, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM), to ICD-10, on 1 October 2015. This transition is one of the largest and most technically challenging changes that the medical community has experienced in the past several decades. This article outlines the implications of moving to ICD-10 and recommends resources to facilitate the transition.

The Tragedy of the Implementation of ICD-10-CM as ICD-10: Is the Cart Before the Horse or Is There a Tragic Paradox of Misinformation and Ignorance?

The forced implementation of ICD-10-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification) codes that are specific to the United States, scheduled for implementation October 1, 2015, which is vastly different from ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision), implemented worldwide, which has 14,400 codes, compared to ICD-10-CM with 144,000 codes to be implemented in the United States is a major concern to practicing U.S. physicians and a bonanza for health IT and hospital industry. This implementation is based on a liberal interpretation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which requires an update to ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification) and says nothing about ICD-10 or beyond. On June 29, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency unreasonably interpreted the Clean Air Act when it decided to set limits on the emissions of toxic pollutants from power plants, without first considering the costs on the industry. Thus, to do so is applicable to the medical industry with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) unreasonably interpreting HIPAA and imposing existent extensive regulations without considering the cost. In the United States, ICD-10-CM with a 10-fold increase in the number of codes has resulted in a system which has become so complicated that it no longer compares with any other country. Moreover, most WHO members use the ICD-10 system (not ICD-10-CM) only to record mortality in 138 countries or morbidity in 99 countries. Currently, only 10 countries employ ICD-10 (not ICD-10-CM) in the reimbursement process, 6 of which have a single payer health care system. Development of ICD-10-CM is managed by 4 non-physician groups, known as cooperating parties. They include the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), CMS, the American Hospital Association (AHA), and the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA). The AHIMA has taken the lead with the AHA just behind, both with escalating profits and influence, essentially creating a statutory monopoly for their own benefit. Further, the ICD-10-CM coalition includes 3M which will boost its revenues and profits substantially with its implementation and Blue Cross Blue Shield which has its own agenda. Physician groups are not a party to these cooperating parties or coalitions, having only a peripheral involvement. ICD-10-CM creates numerous deficiencies with 500 codes that are more specific in ICD-9-CM than ICD-10-CM. The costs of an implementation are enormous, along with maintenance costs, productivity, and cash disruptions.

A Strategic Plan for Integrating ICD-10 in Your Practice and Workflow.

The adoption of the International Classification of Disease (ICD) 10th Revision (ICD-10) diagnosis code set in the United States has been legislatively delayed several times with the most recent date for implementation set for October 1, 2015. The transition from ICD-9 to ICD-10 will be a major undertaking that will require a substantial amount of planning. In the following article, we outline the steps to develop and implement a strategic plan for the transition to the new code set, identify training needs throughout the practice, and review the challenges and opportunities associated with the transition to ICD-10.

Administrative simplification: change to the compliance date for the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10-CM and ICD-10-PCS) medical data code sets. Final rule.

This final rule implements section 212 of the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 by changing the compliance date for the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) for diagnosis coding, including the Official ICD-10-CM Guidelines for Coding and Reporting, and the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Procedure Coding System (ICD-10-PCS) for inpatient hospital procedure coding, including the Official ICD-10-PCS Guidelines for Coding and Reporting, from October 1, 2014 to October 1, 2015. It also requires the continued use of the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification, Volumes 1 and 2 (diagnoses), and 3 (procedures) (ICD-9-CM), including the Official ICD-9-CM Guidelines for Coding and Reporting, through September 30, 2015.

Medicare program; inpatient rehabilitation facility prospective payment system for federal fiscal year 2015.

This final rule updates the prospective payment rates for inpatient rehabilitation facilities (IRFs) for federal fiscal year (FY) 2015 as required by the statute. This final rule finalizes a policy to collect data on the amount and mode (that is, Individual, Concurrent, Group, and Co-Treatment) of therapy provided in the IRF setting according to therapy discipline, revises the list of diagnosis and impairment group codes that presumptively meet the "60 percent rule'' compliance criteria, provides a way for IRFs to indicate on the Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility-Patient Assessment Instrument (IRF-PAI) form whether the prior treatment and severity requirements have been met for arthritis cases to presumptively meet the "60 percent rule'' compliance criteria, and revises and updates quality measures and reporting requirements under the IRF quality reporting program (QRP). This rule also delays the effective date for the revisions to the list of diagnosis codes that are used to determine presumptive compliance under the "60 percent rule'' that were finalized in FY 2014 IRF PPS final rule and adopts the revisions to the list of diagnosis codes that are used to determine presumptive compliance under the "60 percent rule'' that are finalized in this rule. This final rule also addresses the implementation of the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM), for the IRF prospective payment system (PPS), which will be effective when ICD-10-CM becomes the required medical data code set for use on Medicare claims and IRF-PAI submissions.