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."
- Primary Care Docs Average More Hospital Revenue Than Specialists
- 69% of Employers Plan to Offer Healthcare Coverage After 2014
- How Chargemaster Data May Affect Hospital Revenue
- Insurer's App Aims to Lower Healthcare Costs, Securely
- ED Physicians Key to Half of Hospital Admissions
- Building a Better Healthcare Board
- House Lawmakers Grill CMS Over Health Exchange Navigators
- Q&A: Catholic Health Initiatives' New Senior VP for Capital Finance
- Don't Let Nurses Sink Your Bottom Line
- Hospital Pricing Irks Nurses; More Jobs, Less Pay