Latest ICD-10 Delay Re-shuffles the Deck, Irritates Players
On listservs he monitors, which include "quite a few physicians," he's noticed comments like this: "If we're going to delay a year, and ICD-11 really isn't that far away and it's what the doctors want with SNOMED anyway, is this just one delay until the next delay, and then we jump from ICD-9 to ICD-11?"
"It may make sense to just combine it into one effort. I don't know what the wait [for ICD-11] would be and what the trickle effect of issues are. I don't even know if you can go from ICD-9 to ICD-11, [or] if you have to go from nine to 10 and then 10 to 11.
I told Branzell I had looked into this and it seemed like it was much easier to go to ICD-10 first.
"I think it has to do with the documentation requirements. It's much more intuitive for a physician to code and document into a SNOMED environment."
So while the industry fulminates about the underhanded way the newest ICD-10 delay has made its way into the law books, and the cost of delaying the transition are re-tallied, it would be prudent for us to take a moment to also look around and see just how another 12-month delay re-shuffles the deck in the complex game of healthcare IT and payments.
I'm certain that's what U.S. healthcare's CIOs will be doing for the next few days or weeks.
Scott Mace is senior technology editor at HealthLeaders Media.
- Ratcheting Up Patient Experience Has a Downside
- 12 Hires to Keep Your Hospital Out of Trouble
- Meaningful Use Payment Adjustments Begin
- HL20: Lee Aase—Who's Behind @MayoClinic
- 'Mega Boards' Could be Rural Healthcare Disruptor
- Taming Time and Moving Healthcare Data
- 1 in 5 Eligible Hospitals Penalized for HACs
- HL20: Anne Wojcicki—Unlocking Consumer Access to Genetics
- A Christmas Wish List for US Healthcare
- Narrow Networks Enjoying a Resurgence