Financial impact of introducing the Swiss-DRG reimbursement system on potentially avoidable readmissions at a university hospital.

QUESTION UNDER STUDY: Thirty-day readmissions can be classified as potentially avoidable (PARs) or not avoidable (NARs) by following a specific algorithm (SQLape®). We wanted to assess the financial impact of the Swiss-DRG system, which regroups some readmissions occurring within 18 days after discharge within the initial hospital stay, on PARs at our hospital. METHODS: First, PARs were identified from all hospitalisations recorded in 2011 at our university hospital. Second, 2012 Swiss-DRG readmission rules were applied, regrouped readmissions (RR) were identified, and their financial impact computed. Third, RRs were classified as potentially avoidable (PARRs), not avoidable (NARRs), and others causes (OCRRs). Characteristics of PARR patients and stays were retrieved, and the financial impact of PARRS was computed. RESULTS: A total of 36,777 hospitalisations were recorded in 2011, of which 3,140 were considered as readmissions (8.5%): 1,470 PARs (46.8%) and 1,733 NARs (53.2%). The 2012 Swiss-DRG rules would have resulted in 910 RRs (2.5% of hospitalisations, 29% of readmissions): 395 PARRs (43% of RR), 181 NARRs (20%), and 334 OCRRs (37%). Loss in reimbursement would have amounted to CHF 3.157 million (0.6% of total reimbursement). As many as 95% of the 395 PARR patients lived at home. In total, 28% of PARRs occurred within 3 days after discharge, and 58% lasted less than 5 days; 79% of the patients were discharged home again. Loss in reimbursement would amount to CHF 1.771 million. CONCLUSION: PARs represent a sizeable number of 30-day readmissions, as do PARRs of 18-day RRs in the 2012 Swiss DRG system. They should be the focus of attention, as the PARRs represent an avoidable loss in reimbursement.

Apical access and closure devices for transapical transcatheter heart valve procedures.

The majority of transcatheter aortic valve implantations, structural heart procedures and the newly developed transcatheter mitral valve repair and replacement are traditionally performed either through a transfemoral or a transapical access site, depending on the presence of severe peripheral vascular disease or anatomic limitations. The transapical approach, which carries specific advantages related to its antegrade nature and the short distance between the introduction site and the cardiac target, is traditionally performed through a left anterolateral mini-thoracotomy and requires rib retractors, soft tissue retractors and reinforced apical sutures to secure, at first, the left ventricular apex for the introduction of the stent-valve delivery systems and then to seal the access site at the end of the procedure. However, despite the advent of low-profile apical sheaths and newly designed delivery systems, the apical approach represents a challenge for the surgeon, as it has the risk of apical tear, life-threatening apical bleeding, myocardial damage, coronary damage and infections. Last but not least, the use of large-calibre stent-valve delivery systems and devices through standard mini-thoracotomies compromises any attempt to perform transapical transcatheter structural heart procedures entirely percutaneously, as happens with the transfemoral access site, or via a thoracoscopic or a miniaturised video-assisted percutaneous technique. During the past few years, prototypes of apical access and closure devices for transapical heart valve procedures have been developed and tested to make this standardised successful procedure easier. Some of them represent an important step towards the development of truly percutaneous transcatheter transapical heart valve procedures in the clinical setting.