% of Initial Reviews vs. % of Continued Stay Reviews

I would like to know what other CDI departments are striving for in the balance  % of initial reviews vs. % of continued stay reviews.  Should this be a 50-50 split?  Out of the total reviews performed in one month what should the % of these 2 types of reviews be? 


  • We  have a goal of 10 and 10 for the first 2 years and then increases to 12-15 of each per day after that.
  • we strive for 10 new cases/day with whatever is needed in follow up - i.e. query response, looking for additional cc/mcc/procedure that may change the DRG etc..  The review process will dictate the number of continued stay reviews.    Our primary goal is to touch as many records as possible with a CDI review to reach a certain % overall of records reviewed in the facility
  • Do each of you have a Coverage Rate Goal?

  • Are there any best practices around what an average financial impact per CDS should be?
  • I would also suggest taking into consideration the scope of the review. If CC/MCC capture is the goal then it's easier to review more records. If your CDI's are reviewing for CC/MCC/PSI/Quality/ Clinical Validation/Mortality and/or other things then fewer reviews would be expected. Also are your records electronic, a hybrid or paper?
  • Our goal is 50%...for each month, if they have 175 initial reviews, then we would like to have continued stays conducted on 50% of those cases.
  • Curious as to why same significance is not placed on continued stay reviews?  We have 10 new and concurrents are reviewed as prioritized by the CDS until discharge. I am surprised on how concurrent reviews are left and not looked at again- we found we are able to capture so much more on concurrent reviews and better capture adequate DRG "after careful study"  Goal is 25 cases a day  
  • the "goal" is 100% all IP - the reality is between 85-95%

Sign In or Register to comment.