Subject: MEMO: Georgian DRG questions: version-id and DRG point price in VisualDRG
From: Järveläinen Jussi <[email-masked]>
To: Ketevan Goginashvili <[email-masked]>, Maia maglakelidze-khomeriki <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Cc: Serpola Pekka <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2019 11:37:39 +0000

Thank-you for the meeting!

Memo below what we
agreed on. Notify by immediately if you find that something we agreed on is written different than have understand it.

1.
What would be for you a good logic
version-ID of this grouper?

o
Is GEO2018PR1 or GEO2019PR1 better?

o
Standard version ID is: ++<’PR’ for Production versions>+.

o
Technically we need to select one equally for all the products using the same logic version.

è Agreed:
GEO2018PR1

2.
What would be for you a good default value used in VisualDRG for
cost of DRG point (GEL / point)?

o
Some technical default is required and this can be changed in VisualDRG by yourself.

o
We have now used technical placeholder value 200 GEL / point, which results in (now we have a copy of Latvian weights as agreed on, which doesn’t match 1:1 with Georgian DRG groups, also
this can be updated later) for example for hip-surgery (ICD=S324 and NCSP=NEJ50) that would result in DRG 211N which has weight 1,6514 in Latvian weight table: 1,6514  x 200 = 330,28 GEL, which is quite low,  as calculated DRG revenue in VisualDRG.

o
Having good default value is recommended but not compulsory. Normally weight 1,0 should reflect average cost of all ward encounters based on some reference data set. Technically, this is
not a requirement.

è Agreed: Use
708 GEL / point.

3.
Other questions

·
Status of new definition tables from NCC and potential open issues in those (if any)

Prodacapo has tested the new definition tables from NCC. One technical fixes round was needed (some syntax errors such as ‘+’ characters in some new codes.)

Prodacapo tested the fixed set today.

See attachment for details.

è Agreed:

#1 and #2: Prodacapo sends
a full list of all current ICD codes and their Georgian translations, including also the ATC codes (issue #1 in document) and new missing other codes (#2 in the document), as an Excel file in another mail.

#3 Prodacapo asks Martti to add the two missing codes and ask NCC to create and send a new version (5:th version now) of the definition tables to Prodacapo.

·
Ok for You to use a random sample of 5000 rows from the test data You’ve sent earlier in Georgian VisualDRG Setup kit as a default demo data file?

è
Agreed: Ok

·
Certification by NCC?

i.      Technically not necessary and Prodacapo does not require this, we can agree  on to skip it, even though it’s mentioned in the contract.

ii.      There were ca. 590 cases where reference DRG (as included in NCC tables) was different than actual DRG. It is un known if NCC
has maintained the Georgian test cases data and if these errors are relevant (Kristiina Kahur earlier commented that at least part of these should be ok technically) and prohibiting potential certification.

iii.      Note that work or costs for that is not included in our contract (preparation of request for Certificate etc.). NordDRG Certification
applications and preparations work is done by our Swedish company (Prodacapo Sweden, Gothenburg).

è Agreed: Prodacapo
writes situation and options and to NCC Martti + Kristiina & Cc: Georgian ministry in another mail.

Best regards,

Jussi Järveläinen

Director, R&D

Prodacapo Finland

+358-50-5492236

prodacapo.com

www.logexgroup.com

Follow us at LinkedIn