Soins maternels intensifs (Maternal Intensive Care) en Belgique - KCE
Soins maternels intensifs (Maternal Intensive Care) en Belgique - KCE
Soins maternels intensifs (Maternal Intensive Care) en Belgique - KCE
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>KCE</strong> Reports 94 <strong>Maternal</strong> <strong>Int<strong>en</strong>sive</strong> <strong>Care</strong> in Belgium 35<br />
Pourc<strong>en</strong>tage<br />
80<br />
70<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
30<br />
20<br />
10<br />
19 see app<strong>en</strong>dix<br />
0<br />
The level of severity of illness - classification within the APR-DRG is a complex matrix,<br />
which was designed to calculate the hospital workload and the therefore required<br />
finance. These levels of severity are based mainly on secondary diagnoses.<br />
The relation betwe<strong>en</strong> the level of severity and the seriousness of the pathology is not<br />
straightforward. Each woman has only one main diagnosis, but wom<strong>en</strong> can have more<br />
than one second diagnosis<br />
The MKG/RCM database unfortunately provides no longitudinal follow-up. Moreover,<br />
for privacy reasons, exact dates are unknown. Only number of week, month and year<br />
are available.<br />
The MKG/RCM database contains a wide array of variables pertaining to the diagnostic<br />
and therapeutic aspects of the admission as well as a number of pati<strong>en</strong>t characteristics;<br />
information on the successive bed types and services during the stay. There is a specific<br />
database for newborns. 19<br />
It is important to note that this MKG/RCM database is used primarily to measure<br />
hospital case-mix for financing, not epidemiological purposes. Thus reporting bias can<br />
not be ruled out.The level of severity is determined by the coded secondary diagnoses.<br />
It is highly unlikely that from 1997 to 2004, the actual morbidity has increased. The<br />
increase of the coded level of severity is a well-described and well-known ph<strong>en</strong>om<strong>en</strong>on,<br />
it implies that pati<strong>en</strong>ts are placed in higher level of severity yielding a higher standard<br />
price than justified by their actual health status (Bjørn<strong>en</strong>ak et al., 2000)(Hsia et al.,<br />
1988)(Colin Preyra, 2004) 20 . In this context, it is very interesting to see the Belgian<br />
evolution of the severity in the APR-DRG along the years.<br />
Figure 2: Evolution of the degree of severity 1<br />
Proportion of stays with APR-DRG in degree of severity 1<br />
1997 2000 2001<br />
Years<br />
2002 2003 2004<br />
Source: Feedback Cellule technique - https://tct.fgov.be/etct/anonymous?lang=fr<br />
Figure 3 shows the evolution of the APR-DRG 560: ‘Vaginal delivery’. In 1997, 75.3 % of<br />
the in-pati<strong>en</strong>t stays were attributed a degree of severity I. In 2004, the proportion of<br />
stays in degree of severity I was only 58.1%. The same evolution is noticed for ‘APR-<br />
DRG 540: ‘Caesarean delivery’. The proportion of in-pati<strong>en</strong>t stays with a degree of<br />
severity 1 was 62.4% in 1997 and only 46.4% in 2004. It is rather unlikely that from 1997<br />
to 2004 morbidity has actually increased to such an ext<strong>en</strong>t. Rather, it may be suspected<br />
that increasing proportions of wom<strong>en</strong> with a higher degree of severity of morbidity are<br />
an artefact related to the financial rewarding of higher levels of severity.<br />
APR-DRG 540 c-section<br />
APR-DRG 560 vag delivery