ICD-10 delay reopens door to broader discussion among providers: is ICD-10 even the right way to go?

The postponement of the deadline for healthcare providers to implement ICD-10 (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems) would seem to help ensure that the transition to the new coding system will unfold successfully. However, it is also now allowing time for further discussion in the medical community about whether ICD-10 is the right choice at all. As Meaningful Use Stage 2 requires adoption of the many times more complex SNOMED (Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine), some practitioners suggest that the community should skip ICD-10 altogether. Pointing out that ICD-10 is already 25 years old, they suggest the industry’s time would be better spent transitioning to SNOMED, completing ICD-11, and then implementing that once finished. Others suggest that using two separate, parallel coding systems doesn’t make sense and that one or the other should be chosen and implemented. Of these, some feel the industry should use SNOMED only, claiming that the ICD coding system is geared so specifically toward facilitating reimbursement that it doesn’t support providers in delivering care.

See Modern Healthcare article at “ICD-10: Is it for clinicians or reimbursement?”

Posted in ARRA, Higher Ed, HITECH Act, News, Privacy & Security Tagged with: , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*