LinkedIn discussion: The burden of the ICD-10 delay
This week on ICD10Watch.com, blogger Carl Natale reported that the American Medical Association (AMA) wants the ICD-10 implementation date delayed to Oct. 1, 2015.
"Executive vice president and CEO James Madara has sent a letter (48K PDF download) to the acting administrator for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Marilyn Tavenner, that asks for the delay and a few other things," the blog reads.
Madara also stated that if stakeholders cannot reach consensus on this matter during this two-year delay period, then the move to ICD-10 should be postponed indefinitely.
On the ICD10Watch LinkedIn Group, Patty Harper, CEO, business & healthcare consultant at InQuiseek LLC, wrote that perhaps the more appropriate question is what does the AMA not want.
"I have interacted with some of the physicians who took the original Resolution 216 to House of Delegates last fall that began the delay initiative," she commented. "What I am hearing is that docs just want to practice medicine without mandates for EHR and ICD-10. They don't want the burden of being the frontline collectors of healthcare statistics."
In the blog, Natale explains that it looks like healthcare providers are also going to need a comprehensive steering committee. The three initiatives include: ICD-10, Meaningful Use Stage 2 and Healthcare Reform. However, medical practices and small hospitals may not feel they have the resources to handle these at the same time.
"I completely agree in a broader approach that will focus alignment between the big 3; Meaningful Use, ARRA and ICD-10," commented Pamela Eustace, lead project manager at Huntington Hospital, on the LinkedIn Group. "For those finding trouble getting traction in one of the 3; an aligned and coordinated approach may be the answer. There are only enough resources to go around. It's the steering committee, those to do the work on remediation and the physician partners."
Joe Nichols, MD and principal of Health Data Consulting, agreed with Eustace's remarks.
"Meaningful use won't be meaningful and healthcare reform won't really reform anything if we don't have a better level of understanding of the patient's health state and the procedures done to maintain or improve that health state," he wrote. "Better information is a first and foundational step. We should get that right before we move to far into other initiatives."
"Just the words 'steering committee' seems too narrow in this context," replied Harper. "Engaging stakeholders and creating buy-in is the alternative. Hospitals will not survive without reinventing their business models internally in the face of the external challenges."
Commenters on the ICD10Watch website have voiced that it seems the AMA, who owns their own code set, is saying they don't want to use anything new. Commenter Vicky Howe said now that someone has provided it, they don't want it implemented.
"I don't see the AMA offering up other solutions at this point. If they want to propose a delay and ask for it to be delayed indefinitely then I feel they should have offered up a solution," she wrote.
What should the AMA's next step be in the delay of ICD-10? Tweet us @HFNewsTweet and share your opinions!
