ICD-10 Cost, Timing Concerns Explain AMA Vote
Bowman added that those concerned about moving from the antiquated coding system, "have had an extensive public debate about ICD-10 over the last 10-15 years, and the federal government has come out with a final regulation to move forward." The government was responsive to those concerns, even delaying implementation by several years.
Lastly, she argues, "It's important to remember that as time marches on, ICD-10 doesn't get any easier or cheaper to implement."
"With meaningful use, electronic health records, value-based purchasing and payment reform, frankly, a lot of us wish we already had ICD-10 in place. If we did, we could be taking advantage of better data today."
The AMA delegates, however, are steadfast. In their resolution they make the following points:
- Physicians are already under much stress both from increased paperwork and increased financial obligations of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and electronic medical record requirements
- If ICD-10 is enforced to the letter of the law, physicians will need certified coders to read the physician's notes and add the diagnosis codes in order to prevent payers from denying payment."
- Providers Lag as Consumers Set Agenda
- Look Beyond Nurse-Patient Ratios
- Reform Puts Vise Grips on Physicians
- Esther Dyson Launches Population Health Challenge
- Crisis Spurs Healthcare Payment Reform in Arkansas
- Hospital Groups Back NQF Report on Patient Sociodemographics
- ICD-10 Delay Alters Provider, Vendor Prep
- Medicare Opt-Out a Viable Physician Strategy
- NPP Demand Rising Under Value-Based Care Models
- Reduce Readmissions by Activating Patients to Do 'Self-Care'