Screen Reader Mode Icon
The purpose of this survey is to gather detailed insights into how healthcare institutions categorize and manage admission types (specifically urgent vs. elective), to assess the need for evaluation requests to the National Uniform Billing Committee (NUBC) definitions.

By analyzing institutional practices, challenges, and innovations in admission type determination, the ACDIS Regulatory Committee aims to identify discrepancies and areas where current definitions may fall short. This effort is directed at ensuring patient admission categorization accurately reflects clinical realities, thereby impacting patient safety, billing processes, and healthcare delivery efficiency. The collected data from this survey will inform a potential submission by the ACDIS Regulatory Committee to the NUBC, advocating for revised admission type definitions that better align with contemporary healthcare practices, supporting improved patient care, and reducing systemic inefficiencies.

We thank you for your input! Please reach out to the ACDIS Regulatory Committee Coordinator, Jess Fluegel at jess.fluegel@hcpro.com with any questions.

Question Title

* 1. Are you aware of the potential impact of admission type on patient safety indicators (PSIs)?

Question Title

* 2. Who at your institution determine(s) the admission type of a patient (urgent vs. elective)?

Question Title

* 3. Has your institution developed any internal guidelines or criteria that expand upon the NUBC definitions for urgent and elective admissions?

Question Title

* 4. How does your institution classify admissions that initially appear as scheduled but are changed to direct admissions due to unforeseen issues?

Question Title

* 5. How does your institution stay informed about and comply with changes in policy or regulations related to admission types?

Question Title

* 6. On a scale of 1 to 5, how impactful have any educational initiatives been in informing staff about the consequences of incorrect admission type selection?

Question Title

* 7. On a scale of 1 to 5, rate the effectiveness of your institution's continuous improvement measures in ensuring the accuracy and appropriateness of admission type categorization.

Question Title

* 8. On a scale of 1 to 5, how would you rate the impact of regular audits or compliance checks on admission type accuracy in your institution?

Question Title

* 9. On a scale of 1 to 5, how much have benchmarking activities inspired improvement initiatives in accurately determining admission types?

Question Title

* 10. At your institution, has the quality department ever collaborated with providers to change the admission type from elective to urgent based on surgeon documentation or other complicating circumstances?

Question Title

* 11. Is there a second-level review process involving the CDI team for pre-bill quality reviews related to admission type at your institution?

Question Title

* 12. Regarding the definitions of admission types (emergent, urgent, elective, etc.), has your organization adopted the universal definitions provided by authoritative bodies (e.g., NUBC), or have you developed custom definitions?

Question Title

* 13. Please specify any particular service lines or care delivery models for which custom definitions have been developed, if applicable.

0 of 13 answered
 

T