Grace
period agreement likely the death knell for another ICD-10 delay
July 8, 2015 | By Dan Bowman
In
announcing a joint effort with the American Medical Association to ease the transition
to ICD-10 for providers, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services on Monday essentially sounded the death knell for the possibility of a
fourth delay.
CMS
said that, for the first year after the transition, it will not deny or audit
Medicare claims from providers based solely on the specificity of diagnosis
codes, as long as the codes on such claims are from the correct family in the
new code set. What's more, if Medicare contractors cannot process claims due to
problems with ICD-10, CMS will authorize advance payments to physicians.
Additionally, an ICD-10 ombudsman employed by CMS will work to
sort through issues as they arise via a "Coordination Center,"
according to the agency.
While
AMA wasn't the only organization opposed to the transition, it certainly was
the most vocal. In May, it backed Rep. Ted Poe's proposal to eliminate ICD-10. And last
November, then-AMA President Robert Wah joked that the association wanted to freeze
ICD-10 in carbonite.
Now,
AMA and CMS are seemingly locking arms and singing Kumbaya.
The
plan offers a solution similar to legislation floated by Reps. Diane Black (R-Tenn.) and Gary Palmer (R-Ala.), who proposed grace periods of 18 months and
two years, respectively. However, the key differentiator, according to American
Health Information Management Association Senior Director of Coding Policy and
Compliance Sue Bowman, is the requirement that codes stay within certain
familial parameters. AHIMA opposed both Congress members' solutions, but offered support for the CMS-AMA collaborative effort, as did
both Black and Palmer.
"The
other proposals were too open ended," Bowman told FierceHealthIT.
"We were concerned about the potential for wildly erroneous data and even
fraud and abuse. The other proposals opened the door to say you could put any
code on a claim and somehow expect to be paid with no questions asked."
Bowman
said the new solution offers some flexibility for providers to learn the system
and not have to worry about some of the specificity early on, while still
requiring a basic level of accuracy.
"This
got to the heart of what the physician community really wanted, which was not
too much rigidity during the learning curve period," she said.
While
pressure from the AMA and other groups no doubt loomed large, Bowman said the
desire to ensure a smooth and successful transition likely was the biggest
factor in CMS' decision to move forward with the grace period.
Whatever
the case, she hopes that now people will have less anxiety, and will focus more
on getting ready for the compliance state.
With
AMA, CMS and AHIMA all on the same page, that's probably a safe bet. - Dan (@Dan_Bowman and @FierceHealthIT)
No comments:
Post a Comment