’Countdown to ICD-10???’

Today’s Editor’s Note is from a blog by William F. Mills, MD, MMM, CPE, FACPE, FAAFP, senior vice president of quality and professional affairs for Upper Allegheny Health System and co-author of The Medical Executive Committee Manual. His post sums up the sentiment around our office regarding the postponement of ICD-10’s implementation. Is this postponement a big relief for your medical staff department? A nonevent?

Dr. Mills writes: “Well, maybe next year. It does appear that the government has decided to delay the implementation of ICD-10 until “at least” October 2015. For some this is great news and to others an amazing disappointment. As stated in Health Management Technology, ‘It has been estimated that another one-year delay of ICD-10 would likely cost the industry an additional $1 billion to $6.6 billion on top of the already incurred costs from the previous one-year delay. This does not include the lost opportunity costs of failing to move to a more effective code set.’

“A little history: ICD-10 was endorsed by the Forty-third World Health Assembly in May 1990 and came into use in 1994. The 11th revision of the classification has already started and will continue until 2017. ICD-10 is available in the six official languages of WHO (Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian, and Spanish) as well as in 36 other languages. More than 100 countries are currently using ICD-10, including the vast majority of industrialized countries. But most likely these are the countries that are using the metric system, so we shouldn’t judge too hastily.

“In the end, the ICD-10 codes will be a benefit to physicians, patients, and everyone who works to promote quality healthcare around the country and the world. The codes are much more specific than their previous counterparts and as you know, the number of diagnostic codes has almost quadrupled. This will allow the healthcare industry to understand more clearly the nature of patients’ illness and determine the cost of treatment. While making the transition will take time, money and additional resources, the long-term benefits are significant. So the current plan is to take more time and spend more money. With luck, we can implement ICD-10 just in time to implement ICD-11. Since ICD-9 was adopted in 1979, who knows, we may get 40-50 years out of that coding set before a change is made. Luckily, there hasn’t been much change in healthcare over the past 35 years. But for now, back to life as usual with our good friend—ICD-9.

“Forget the eagle as our national bird—I’m voting for the ostrich.” 

Thanks for reading!

Mary Stevens, editor, Medical Staff Leader Insider