Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T14:16:54.422Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Development and evaluation of a case group concept for inpatients with mental disorders in Germany: Using self-report and expert-rated instruments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2020

Sylke Andreas ,
Jörg Dirmaier ,
Timo Harfst ,
Stephan Kawski ,
Uwe Koch  and
Holger Schulz
Sylke Andreas*
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Psychology, Centre of Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, Building S 35, 20246Hamburg, Germany
Jörg Dirmaier
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Psychology, Centre of Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, Building S 35, 20246Hamburg, Germany
Timo Harfst
Affiliation:
Federal Psychotherapists' Chamber (Bundespsychotherapeutenkammer)Berlin, Germany
Stephan Kawski
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Psychology, Centre of Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, Building S 35, 20246Hamburg, Germany
Uwe Koch
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Psychology, Centre of Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, Building S 35, 20246Hamburg, Germany
Holger Schulz
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Psychology, Centre of Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, Building S 35, 20246Hamburg, Germany
*
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 40 42803 7705; fax: +49 40 42803 4940. E-mail address: sandreas@uke.uni-hamburg.de (S. Andreas).
Get access

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate a case-mix system to classify inpatients with mental disorders in Germany by means of self-report and expert-rated instruments. The use of case-mix systems enhances the transparency of performance and cost structure and can thus improve the quality of mental health care. We analysed a consecutive sample of 1677 inpatients with mental disorders from 11 hospitals using regression tree analysis. The model assigns patients to 17 groups, accounting for 17% of the variance for duration of stay. Patients with eating disorders had a longer duration of stay than patients with anxiety disorder, duration of mental illness of less than 3–5 years, lower levels of interpersonal problems and higher occupational position. The results showed that besides diagnosis, variables such as duration of illness and interpersonal problems are important for classifying inpatients with mental disorders. The results of the study should be critically reviewed regarding the empirical results of other studies and the appropriateness of case group concepts for inpatients with mental disorders.

Keywords

Psychiatric disorderQuality of carePsychotherapyCase group conceptDRG
Type
Original article
Information
European Psychiatry , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , March 2009 , pp. 105 - 111
Copyright
Copyright © Elsevier Masson SAS 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashcraft, M.L., Fries, B.E., Nerenz, D.R., Falcon, S.P., Srivastava, S.V., Lee, C.Z.et al.A Psychiatric patient classification system: an alternative to diagnosis-related groups. Medical Care 1989;27(5):543–557Google ScholarPubMed
Andreas, S., Dirmaier, J., Lang, K., Watzke, B., Koch, U., Ranneberg, J.et al.Predictors of resource use in inpatient psychotherapy: development of a German case group concept for patients with mental disorders. Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie 2004;54:280–288CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andreas, S., Harfst, T., Dirmaier, J., Kawski, S., Koch, U., Schulz, H.A psychometric evaluation of the German version of the “Health of the Nation Outcome Scales, HoNOS-D”: on the feasibility and reliability of a clinician-rated measure of severity in patients with mental disorders. Psychopathology 2007;40:116–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buckingham, B., Burgess, P., Solomon, S., Pirkis, J., Eagar, K.Developing a casemix classification for mental health services: summary Canberra: Commonwealth Department of Health & Family Services 1998Google Scholar
Carthew, R., Elphick, M., Page, R.. Report on the development of mental health groupings. Winchester; 2003.Google Scholar
Drozd, E., Cromwell, J., Gage, B., Maier, J., Greenwald, L., Goldman, H.Patient casemix classification for Medicare psychiatric prospective payment. American Journal of Psychiatry 2006;163:724–732CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Derogatis, L.SCL-90-R, administration, scoring & procedures manual for the R(evised) version Towson, MDClinic Psychometric Research 1983Google Scholar
Duckett, S.J.The development of Australian refined diagnosis related groups: the Australian inpatient casemix classification. Casemix Quarterly 2000;2:115–120Google Scholar
English, J.T., Sharfstein, S., Scherl, D.J., Astrachan, B., Muszynski, I.L.Diagnosis-Related groups and general hospital psychiatry: the APA study. American Journal of Psychiatry 1986;143(2):131–139Google ScholarPubMed
Fetter, R.B., Shin, Y., Freeman, J.L., Averill, R.F., Thompson, J.D.Case mix definition by diagnosis-related groups. Medical Care 1980;18:1–53Google ScholarPubMed
Gaines, P., Bower, A., Buckingham, W., Eager, K., Burgess, P., Green, J.New Zealand Mental Health Classification and Outcomes Study: final report AucklandHealth Research Council of New Zealand 2003Google Scholar
Horn, S.D., Chambers, A.F., Sharkey, D.P., Horn, R.A.Psychiatric severity of illness: a Case Mix Study. Medical Care 1989;27(1):69–84CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horowitz, L.M., Rosenberg, S.E., Baer, B.A., Ureño, G., Villaseñor, V.S.Inventory of interpersonal problems: psychometric properties and clinical applications. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1988;56(6):885–892CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lave, J., Leinhardt, S.An evaluation of a hospital stay regulatory mechanism. American Journal of Public Health 1976;66:959Google ScholarPubMed
Mitchell, J.B., Dicey, B., Liptzin, B., Sederer, L.J.Bringing psychiatric patients into the medicare prospective payment system: alternatives to DRGs. American Journal of Psychiatry 1987;144(5):610–615Google ScholarPubMed
Magidson, J.The CHAID approach to segmentation modeling: chi-squared automatic interaction detectionBagozzi, R.P.Advanced methods of marketing research Malden, MassachusettsBlackwell 1997 118–160Google Scholar
Radloff, L.The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement 1977;1(3):385–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoskopf, C., Horn, S.D.The Computerized Psychiatric Severity Index as a predictor of inpatient length of stay for psychoses. Medical Care 1991;29(3):179–195CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stoskopf, C., Horn, S.D.Predicting length of stay for patients with psychoses. Health Services Research 1992;26(6):743–766Google ScholarPubMed
SPSS, Answer Tree 3.1 for Windows ChicagoSPSS 2004Google Scholar
Taube, C., Lee, E.S., Forthofer, R.N.Diagnosis-Related Groups for mental disorders, alcoholism, and drug abuse: evaluation and alternatives. Hospital and Community Psychiatry 1984;35(5):452–455Google ScholarPubMed
Taube, C., Lee, E.S., Forthofer, R.N.DRGs in psychiatry. An empirical evaluation. Medical Care 1984;22:597–610CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trösken, A.K.Assessing patient resources: the Berner Resource InventoryDas Berner Ressourceninventar: Ressourcenpotentiale und Ressourcenrealisierung aus konsistenztheoretischer Sicht] BernUniversität Bern 2002Google Scholar
Ware, J.E., Kosinski, M., Dewey, J.E., Gandek, B.How to score and interpret single-item health status measures: a manual for users of the SF-8 Health Survey LincolnQuality Metric 2000Google Scholar
Wing, J.K., Beevor, A.S., Curtis, R.H., Park, S.B.G., Hadden, S., Burns, A.Health of the Nation Outcome Scales (HoNOS): research and development. The British Journal of Psychiatry 1998;172:11–18CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clinical descriptions and diagnostic guidelinesWorld Health Organisation, The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioural disorders GenevaWorld Health Organisation 1992Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.