scholarly journals Survival Strategies for Tsunami of ICD-10-CM for Interventionalists: Pursue or Perish!

2015 ◽  
Vol 5;18 (5;9) ◽  
pp. E685-E712
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Pain Management ◽  
Health Information ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Classification ◽  
American Hospital ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Interventional Pain Management

The unfunded mandate for the implementation of International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) is scheduled October 1, 2015. The development of ICD-10-CM has been a complicated process. We have endeavored to keep Interventional Pain Management doctors apprised via a variety of related topical manuscripts. The major issues relate to the lack of formal physician participation in its preparation. While the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA) and American Hospital Association (AHA) as active partners in its preparation. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are major players; 3M and Blue Cross Blue Shield Association are also involved. The cost of ICD-10-CM implementation is high, similar to the implementation of electronic health records (EHRs), likely consuming substantial resources. While ICD-10, utilized worldwide, includes 14,400 different codes, ICD-10-CM, specific for the United States, has expanded to 144,000 codes, which also includes procedural coding system. It is imperative for physicians to prepare for the mandatory implementation. Conversion from ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM coding in interventional pain management is not a conversion of one to one that can be easily obtained from software packages. It is a both a difficult and time-consuming task with each physician, early on, expected to spend on estimation at least 10 minutes per visit on extra coding for established and new patients. For interventional pain physicians, there have been a multitude of changes, including creation of new codes and confusing conversion of existing codes. This manuscript describes a variety of codes that are relevant to interventional pain physicians and often utilized in daily practices. It is our objective that this manuscript will provide coding assistance to interventional pain physicians. Key words: ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth revision, Clinical Modification), ICD-10, ICD-10-CM (International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision), Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), Health Information Technology (HIT)

scholarly journals The Tragedy of the Implementation of ICD-10- CM as ICD-10: Is the Cart Before the Horse or Is There a Tragic Paradox of Misinformation and Ignorance?

2015 ◽  
Vol 18;4 (4;18) ◽  
pp. E485-E495
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Insurance ◽  
Health Information ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
Health Insurance Portability

The forced implementation of ICD-10-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification) codes that are specific to the United States, scheduled for implementation October 1, 2015, which is vastly different from ICD-10 (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision), implemented worldwide, which has 14,400 codes, compared to ICD-10-CM with 144,000 codes to be implemented in the United States is a major concern to practicing U.S. physicians and a bonanza for health IT and hospital industry. This implementation is based on a liberal interpretation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which requires an update to ICD-9- CM (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification) and says nothing about ICD-10 or beyond. On June 29, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency unreasonably interpreted the Clean Air Act when it decided to set limits on the emissions of toxic pollutants from power plants, without first considering the costs on the industry. Thus, to do so is applicable to the medical industry with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) unreasonably interpreting HIPAA and imposing existent extensive regulations without considering the cost. In the United States, ICD-10-CM with a 10-fold increase in the number of codes has resulted in a system which has become so complicated that it no longer compares with any other country. Moreover, most WHO members use the ICD-10 system (not ICD-10-CM) only to record mortality in 138 countries or morbidity in 99 countries. Currently, only 10 countries employ ICD-10 (not ICD-10-CM) in the reimbursement process, 6 of which have a single payer health care system. Development of ICD-10-CM is managed by 4 non-physician groups, known as cooperating parties. They include the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), CMS, the American Hospital Association (AHA), and the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA). The AHIMA has taken the lead with the AHA just behind, both with escalating profits and influence, essentially creating a statutory monopoly for their own benefit. Further, the ICD-10-CM coalition includes 3M which will boost its revenues and profits substantially with its implementation and Blue Cross Blue Shield which has its own agenda. Physician groups are not a party to these cooperating parties or coalitions, having only a peripheral involvement. ICD-10-CM creates numerous deficiencies with 500 codes that are more specific in ICD-9-CM than ICD-10-CM. The costs of an implementation are enormous, along with maintenance costs, productivity, and cash disruptions. Key words: ICD-10-CM, ICD-10, ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Ninth revision, Clinical Modification), Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), Health Information Technology (HIT), costs of implementation

scholarly journals Analysis of obstetric code accuracy at hospital X in Padang 2018 based on international classification of diseases the 10th revision

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 1250
Author(s):  
Yastori .
Keyword(s):  
Health Information ◽  
Medical Record ◽  
Medical Records ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
The Republic

Background: Coding is one of the competencies of the  health  information  recorder  which has  a  very  important  role  in  supporting  the  improvement  of  the  quality  of health services in accordance with the republic of Indonesia decree  No. 377/Menkes/SK/III/2007 regarding the professional standards of medical record  and health information, medical recorders must be able to establish codes for diagnosis of disease and medical treatment appropriately. The accuracy of coding is related to financing claims, especially for hospitals that work with health service providers such as health insurance. The purpose of this study is to analyze the accuracy of coding based on international classification of diseases the 10th revision (ICD-10).Methods: Research using descriptive methods with a qualitative approach. The data collection technique used is the observation method that is direct observation of the medical record file. 56 medical records were randomly selected and recoded blindly (as gold standard). Processing statistical data using pivot tables and for coding analysis using ICD-10.Results: Accurate diagnosis code based on the ICD-10 is 14 (25%) and an inaccurate 42 (75%) of 56 diagnoses in the medical record file.  The most inaccurate code found is the fourth character with 22 codes.Conclusions: The inaccuracy of coding at hospital X in Padang was caused among others by the doctor's writing that was not clearly read, errors in the selection in sub categories and in the selection of the character code. In addition, people who work in the medical records section are generally not from a medical record background.

scholarly journals A Seamless Navigation to ICD-10-CM for Interventional Pain Physicians: Is a Rude Awakening Avoidable?

2016 ◽  
Vol 1;19 (1;1) ◽  
pp. E1-E14
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Information Technology ◽  
Health Information Technology ◽  
Health Information ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Survival Strategies ◽  
Information Technology Industry ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Icd 10

Since October 1, 2015, the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) was integrated into U.S. medical practices. This monumental transition seemingly occurred rather unceremoniously, despite significant opposition and reservations having been expressed by the provider community. In prior publications, we have described various survival strategies for interventional pain physicians. The regulators and beneficiaries of system – CMS, consultants, and health information technology industry are congratulating themselves for a job well done. Nonetheless, this transition comes at an immeasurable financial and psychological drain on providers. However, a rude awakening may be making its way with expiration of initial concessions from government and private payers. This manuscript provides a template for interventional pain management professionals with multiple steps for seamless navigation, including descriptions of the most commonly used codes, navigation through ICD-10-CM manual, steps for correct coding, and finally, detailed coding descriptions for various interventional techniques. Key words: ICD-9-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth revision, Clinical Modification), ICD-10, ICD-10-CM (International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision), Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), Health Information Technology (HIT)

Nosology and Vital Statistics of Dementing Conditions of Elderly People

1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-28
Author(s):  
David W. E. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Death Certificate ◽  
Current System ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
The United States ◽  
Vital Statistics ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Death Certification ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Icd 10

The nosology of dementing conditions of very old people, as described in the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) and reported in Vital Statistics of the United States, is examined. Methods included a questionnaire of state officials who oversee death certification that asked chiefly about death certificate entries that denote dementing conditions. Current nosology includes several dementing conditions that are commonly indistinguishable without a postmortem examination. Dementing conditions are grouped with other conditions of unrelated pathogenesis. The words “psychosis” and “dementia” are used interchangeably. The majority of state officials said that some death certificate entries denoting dementing conditions are acceptable as causes of death. The current system of nosology of dementing conditions probably results in the under-reporting of these conditions in vital statistics. The tenth revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) classifies dementing conditions similarly to the ninth revision. An alternative system of nosology, based on dementia as a common characteristic, is suggested.

scholarly journals A narrative review of the impact of the transition to ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM/PCS

JAMIA Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 126-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheila V Kusnoor ◽  
Mallory N Blasingame ◽  
Annette M Williams ◽  
Spencer J DesAutels ◽  
Jing Su ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
The United States ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Morbidity And Mortality ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Icd 10 ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Mortality Surveillance

Abstract Objectives The United States transitioned to the tenth version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) system (ICD-10) for mortality coding in 1999 and to the International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification and Procedure Coding System (ICD-10-CM/PCS) on October 1, 2015. The purpose of this study was to conduct a narrative literature review to better understand the impact of the implementation of ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS. Materials and Methods We searched English-language articles in PubMed, Web of Science, and Business Source Complete and reviewed websites of relevant professional associations, government agencies, research groups, and ICD-10 news aggregators to identify literature on the impact of the ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS transition. We used Google to search for additional gray literature and used handsearching of the references of the most on-target articles to help ensure comprehensiveness. Results Impact areas reported in the literature include: productivity and staffing, costs, reimbursement, coding accuracy, mapping between ICD versions, morbidity and mortality surveillance, and patient care. With the exception of morbidity and mortality surveillance, quantitative studies describing the actual impact of the ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS implementation were limited and much of the literature was based on the ICD-10-CM/PCS transition rather than the earlier conversion to ICD-10 for mortality coding. Discussion This study revealed several gaps in the literature that limit the ability to draw reliable conclusions about the overall impact, positive or negative, of moving to ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS in the United States. Conclusion These knowledge gaps present an opportunity for future research and knowledge sharing and will be important to consider when planning for ICD-11.

Angststörungen – von der ICD-10 zur ICD-11

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Timo D. Vloet ◽  
Marcel Romanos
Keyword(s):  
Mental Disorders ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Statistical Manual ◽  
Diagnostic And Statistical Manual ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Icd 10

Zusammenfassung. Hintergrund: Nach 12 Jahren Entwicklung wird die 11. Version der International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) von der Weltgesundheitsorganisation (WHO) im Januar 2022 in Kraft treten. Methodik: Im Rahmen eines selektiven Übersichtsartikels werden die Veränderungen im Hinblick auf die Klassifikation von Angststörungen von der ICD-10 zur ICD-11 zusammenfassend dargestellt. Ergebnis: Die diagnostischen Kriterien der generalisierten Angststörung, Agoraphobie und spezifischen Phobien werden angepasst. Die ICD-11 wird auf Basis einer Lebenszeitachse neu organisiert, sodass die kindesaltersspezifischen Kategorien der ICD-10 aufgelöst werden. Die Trennungsangststörung und der selektive Mutismus werden damit den „regulären“ Angststörungen zugeordnet und können zukünftig auch im Erwachsenenalter diagnostiziert werden. Neu ist ebenso, dass verschiedene Symptomdimensionen der Angst ohne kategoriale Diagnose verschlüsselt werden können. Diskussion: Die Veränderungen im Bereich der Angsterkrankungen umfassen verschiedene Aspekte und sind in der Gesamtschau nicht unerheblich. Positiv zu bewerten ist die Einführung einer Lebenszeitachse und Parallelisierung mit dem Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Schlussfolgerungen: Die entwicklungsbezogene Neuorganisation in der ICD-11 wird auch eine verstärkte längsschnittliche Betrachtung von Angststörungen in der Klinik sowie Forschung zur Folge haben. Damit rückt insbesondere die Präventionsforschung weiter in den Fokus.

scholarly journals Neue Terminologie für Sprachentwicklungsstörungen?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Neumann ◽  
B. Arnold ◽  
A. Baumann ◽  
C. Bohr ◽  
H. A. Euler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
International Classification ◽  
International Classification Of Disease ◽  
Diagnostik Und Therapie ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Icd 10

Zusammenfassung Hintergrund Sprachtherapeutisch-linguistische Fachkreise empfehlen die Anpassung einer von einem internationalen Konsortium empfohlenen Änderung der Nomenklatur für Sprachstörungen im Kindesalter, insbesondere für Sprachentwicklungsstörungen (SES), auch für den deutschsprachigen Raum. Fragestellung Ist eine solche Änderung in der Terminologie aus ärztlicher und psychologischer Sicht sinnvoll? Material und Methode Kritische Abwägung der Argumente für und gegen eine Nomenklaturänderung aus medizinischer und psychologischer Sicht eines Fachgesellschaften- und Leitliniengremiums. Ergebnisse Die ICD-10-GM (Internationale statistische Klassifikation der Krankheiten und verwandter Gesundheitsprobleme, 10. Revision, German Modification) und eine S2k-Leitlinie unterteilen SES in umschriebene SES (USES) und SES assoziiert mit anderen Erkrankungen (Komorbiditäten). Die USES- wie auch die künftige SES-Definition der ICD-11 (International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision) fordern den Ausschluss von Sinnesbehinderungen, neurologischen Erkrankungen und einer bedeutsamen intellektuellen Einschränkung. Diese Definition erscheint weit genug, um leichtere nonverbale Einschränkungen einzuschließen, birgt nicht die Gefahr, Kindern Sprach- und weitere Therapien vorzuenthalten und erkennt das ICD(International Classification of Disease)-Kriterium, nach dem der Sprachentwicklungsstand eines Kindes bedeutsam unter der Altersnorm und unterhalb des seinem Intelligenzalter angemessenen Niveaus liegen soll, an. Die intendierte Ersetzung des Komorbiditäten-Begriffs durch verursachende Faktoren, Risikofaktoren und Begleiterscheinungen könnte die Unterlassung einer dezidierten medizinischen Differenzialdiagnostik bedeuten. Schlussfolgerungen Die vorgeschlagene Terminologie birgt die Gefahr, ätiologisch bedeutsame Klassifikationen und differenzialdiagnostische Grenzen zu verwischen und auf wertvolles ärztliches und psychologisches Fachwissen in Diagnostik und Therapie sprachlicher Störungen im Kindesalter zu verzichten.

Impact of ICD-9 to ICD-10 Coding Transition on Prevalence Trends in Neurology

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. e612-e619
Author(s):  
Ali G. Hamedani ◽  
Leah Blank ◽  
Dylan P. Thibault ◽  
Allison W. Willis
Keyword(s):  
Time Series ◽  
Status Epilepticus ◽  
Interrupted Time Series ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Disease Prevalence ◽  
Rate Of Change ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Icd 10

ObjectiveTo determine the effect of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) to International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) coding transition on the point prevalence and longitudinal trends of 16 neurologic diagnoses.MethodsWe used 2014–2017 data from the National Inpatient Sample to identify hospitalizations with one of 16 common neurologic diagnoses. We used published ICD-9-CM codes to identify hospitalizations from January 1, 2014, to September 30, 2015, and used the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's MapIt tool to convert them to equivalent ICD-10-CM codes for October 1, 2015–December 31, 2017. We compared the prevalence of each diagnosis before vs after the ICD coding transition using logistic regression and used interrupted time series regression to model the longitudinal change in disease prevalence across time.ResultsThe average monthly prevalence of subarachnoid hemorrhage was stable before the coding transition (average monthly increase of 4.32 admissions, 99.7% confidence interval [CI]: −8.38 to 17.01) but increased after the coding transition (average monthly increase of 24.32 admissions, 99.7% CI: 15.71–32.93). Otherwise, there were no significant differences in the longitudinal rate of change in disease prevalence over time between ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM. Six of 16 neurologic diagnoses (37.5%) experienced significant changes in cross-sectional prevalence during the coding transition, most notably for status epilepticus (odds ratio 0.30, 99.7% CI: 0.26–0.34).ConclusionsThe transition from ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM coding affects prevalence estimates for status epilepticus and other neurologic disorders, a potential source of bias for future longitudinal neurologic studies. Studies should limit to 1 coding system or use interrupted time series models to adjust for changes in coding patterns until new neurology-specific ICD-9 to ICD-10 conversion maps can be developed.

scholarly journals Adverse drug events identified in hospitalized patients in Brazil by International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) code listings

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (12) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Cristina Martins ◽  
Fabíola Giordani ◽  
Lusiele Guaraldo ◽  
Gianni Tognoni ◽  
Suely Rozenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Adverse Drug Events ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Hospitalized Patients ◽  
International Classification ◽  
Administrative Databases ◽  
National Database ◽  
Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Icd 10

Studies of adverse drug events (ADEs) are important in order not to jeopardize the positive impact of pharmacotherapy. These events have substantial impact on the population morbidity profiles, and increasing health system operating costs. Administrative databases are an important source of information for public health purposes and for identifying ADEs. In order to contribute to learning about ADE in hospitalized patients, this study examined the potential of applying ICD-10 (10th revision of the International Classification of Diseases) codes to a national database of the public health care system (SIH-SUS). The study comprised retrospective assessment of ADEs in the SIH-SUS administrative database, from 2008 to 2012. For this, a list of ICD-10 codes relating to ADEs was built. This list was built up by examining lists drawn up by other authors identified by bibliographic search in the MEDLINE and LILACS and consultations with experts. In Brazil, 55,604,537 hospital admissions were recorded in the SIH-SUS, between 2008 and 2012, of which 273,440 (0.49%) were related to at least one ADE. The proportions and rates seem to hold constant over the study period. Fourteen out of 20 most frequent ADEs were identified in codes relating to mental disorders. Intoxications figure as the second most frequently recorded group of ADEs in the SIH-SUS, comprising 76,866 hospitalizations. Monitoring of ADEs in administrative databases using ICD-10 codes is feasible, even in countries with information systems under construction, and can be an innovative tool to complement drug surveillance strategies in place in Brazil, as well as in others countries.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document