How do hospitals support both INA-CBGs and iDRG during the transition period?

A workable transition plan has four parts. One, keep a single source of truth: the discharge summary (resume medis) and its supporting documentation, complete enough that either grouper can read the true complexity of the case — do not maintain one 'version' of an episode per system. Two, train the casemix team on both grouping logics, and follow the official BPJS Kesehatan and Ministry of Health (Kemenkes) channels for updates to E-Klaim and submission workflows rather than improvising ahead of the circulars. Three, run parallel validation on your highest-volume encounter types: group the same coded episodes under both logics and study where the results diverge, because those divergences show exactly where coding specificity or documentation is thin. Four, track pending and denial reasons per system, so a problem introduced by the transition is not misread as a documentation regression, and vice versa.

Notice that three of the four parts are really documentation work. From the Claim Readiness payer-workflow perspective, the upstream discipline begins with purpose-limited, institution-approved patient context and clinician-reviewed documentation. Completeness checks and coding suggestions can support authorized review under either grouper, but the institution's clinicians, coders, and casemix staff own coding and submission, while the payer system owns adjudication. AI writes. Doctors decide.