These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 8540795)

  • 1. Case-mix measurement in medical rehabilitation.
    Stineman MG
    Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 1995 Dec; 76(12):1163-70. PubMed ID: 8540795
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. [Prospective payment in medical rehabilitation].
    Lüngen M; Lauterbach KW
    Rehabilitation (Stuttg); 2003 Jun; 42(3):136-42. PubMed ID: 12813650
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. A modular case-mix classification system for medical rehabilitation illustrated.
    Stineman MG; Granger CV
    Health Care Financ Rev; 1997; 19(1):87-103. PubMed ID: 10180004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Toward a new payment system for inpatient rehabilitation. Part I: Predicting resource consumption.
    Saitto C; Marino C; Fusco D; Arcà M; Perucci CA;
    Med Care; 2005 Sep; 43(9):844-55. PubMed ID: 16116349
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Inpatient rehabilitation facilities are now paid prospective rates.
    Grimaldi PL
    J Health Care Finance; 2002; 28(3):32-48. PubMed ID: 12079150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Application of functional independence measure-function related groups and resource utilization groups-version III systems across post acute settings.
    Eilertsen TB; Kramer AM; Schlenker RE; Hrincevich CA
    Med Care; 1998 May; 36(5):695-705. PubMed ID: 9596060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Rehabilitation costs: implications for prospective payment.
    Schlenker RE; Kramer AM; Hrincevich CA; Eilertsen TB
    Health Serv Res; 1997 Dec; 32(5):651-68. PubMed ID: 9402906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Proposed PPS refinements would boost payments for sickest patients; add no new Medicare money to system.
    Natl Rep Subacute Care; 2000 Apr; 8(8):1-9. PubMed ID: 11009740
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Assessing the effectiveness of postacute care rehabilitation.
    Kane RL
    Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2007 Nov; 88(11):1500-4. PubMed ID: 17964896
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. The impact of the 1997 Balanced Budget Amendment's prospective payment system on patient case mix and rehabilitation utilization in skilled nursing.
    Yip JY; Wilber KH; Myrtle RC
    Gerontologist; 2002 Oct; 42(5):653-60. PubMed ID: 12351800
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Are high rehab RUG scores really for you?
    Smith J; Jolley S
    Contemp Longterm Care; 1999 May; 22(5):21-2. PubMed ID: 10537401
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Medicare program; inpatient rehabilitation facility prospective payment system for FY 2006. Final rule.
    Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS
    Fed Regist; 2005 Aug; 70(156):47879-8006. PubMed ID: 16106591
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Outcomes and costs after hip fracture and stroke. A comparison of rehabilitation settings.
    Kramer AM; Steiner JF; Schlenker RE; Eilertsen TB; Hrincevich CA; Tropea DA; Ahmad LA; Eckhoff DG
    JAMA; 1997 Feb; 277(5):396-404. PubMed ID: 9010172
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The early impact of the inpatient rehabilitation facility prospective payment system on stroke rehabilitation case mix, practice patterns, and outcomes.
    DeJong G; Horn SD; Smout RJ; Ryser DK
    Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2005 Dec; 86(12 Suppl 2):S93-S100. PubMed ID: 16373144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Toward a new payment system for inpatient rehabilitation. Part II: Reimbursing providers.
    Saitto C; Marino C; Fusco D; Arcà M; Perucci CA;
    Med Care; 2005 Sep; 43(9):856-64. PubMed ID: 16116350
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Function-based payment model for inpatient medical rehabilitation: an evaluation.
    Sutton JP; DeJong G; Wilkerson D
    Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 1996 Jul; 77(7):693-701. PubMed ID: 8669997
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Creating a MEDPAR (Medicare provider analysis and review) analog to the RUG-III (Resource Utilization Groups, Version III) classification system.
    Cornelius E; Feldman J; Marsteller JA; Liu K
    Health Care Financ Rev; 1994; 16(2):101-26. PubMed ID: 10142367
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Variation in patient routine costliness in U.S. psychiatric facilities.
    Cromwell J; Drozd EM; Gage B; Maier J; Richter E; Goldman HH
    J Ment Health Policy Econ; 2005 Mar; 8(1):15-28. PubMed ID: 15870482
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Challenges in paying for effective stays.
    Stineman MG; Kallen MA; Thompson C; Gage B
    Med Care; 2005 Sep; 43(9):841-3. PubMed ID: 16116348
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Hospital-based and freestanding skilled nursing facilities: any cause for differential Medicare payments?
    Liu K; Black KJ
    Inquiry; 2003; 40(1):94-104. PubMed ID: 12836911
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.