How to Prevent Another ICD10 Delay

ICD10 Watch by CARL NATALE

How to inoculate ICD-10 coding from another delay

Posted on Wed, Apr 09, 2014 - 08:00 am

Let's be honest. We shouldn't be surprised that an ICD-10 delay became law. It's a concept that is easier to hate than embrace.

The ICD-10 upgrade will be expensive, it's hard to explain without boring people, and a lot of the codes are used as punchlines by politicians. So you can understand why no politician stood up and defended ICD-10 coding as a standard during the debate over the “Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014” debate.

And no one ever will unless the healthcare IT industry makes some serious changes in how it explains ICD-10 coding.

'ICD-9 Kills'

What we need is a dramatic bumper sticker. Something that is succinct and scares the beejesus out of us. Because it's not enough not say we're one of the last civilized countries to use ICD-9 codes. Who cares what they do in Europe? We're Americans. If we can get along without themetric system, we can get along with ICD-10 codes.

Yes, I'm being incredibly flip about it, and I don't want to make stuff up. But we need to have more compelling arguments for implementing ICD-10 coding.

So we need videos of people who have gotten sick or died because there was not enough data about their diagnoses to create informed treatments. Explain how better data can save lives. Put faces and names to the problem.

Specificity is key.

Seriously. If we can't demonstrate how ICD-10 saves lives, learn to love ICD-9 codes.

Explain that we're already using ICD-10 codes

And it hasn't killed anyone. Well, that's because ICD-10 codes have been used since 1999 to describe causes of death.

So show ICD-10 opponents how the codes have been used to understand what is killing us.

Incentivize ICD-10 coding

If the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) had created meaningful use type payments to implement ICD-10 coding, we would have a lot less vigorous opposition.

I understand Congress these days isn't in the habit of giving away money. But if there is any cash available, it would make physicians a lot less angry.

Explain the flaming water skis

Why do we have a diagnosis code for injuries due to flaming water skis? And don't tell me it's useful to know how injuries occurred. You have to do better.

Someone asked for this particular diagnosis. Out that person or association who wanted to count water ski injuries.

Make them explain why it's useful to know that information. Don't let the wanna-be comedians get away with keeping it as a punchline.

Grab every macaw bite, lamppost run-in and jet engine death. Stand someone up who wants to count those diagnoses and make them explain why it matters.

We need to know that these diagnosis codes were not created by sadistic bureaucrats or international conspirators.

Again, I'm advocating specificity because speaking about ICD-10 benefits in general terms isn't working. We need real examples that will give politicians, medical professionals and patients reasons to want ICD-10 codes.