Slashdot Mirror
Doctors On Edge As Healthcare Gears Up For 70,000 Ways To Classify Ailments
HughPickens.com writes: Melinda Beck reports in the WSJ that doctors, hospitals and insurers are bracing for possible disruptions on October 1 when the U.S. health-care system switches to ICD-10, a massive new set of codes for describing illnesses and injuries that expands the way ailments are described from 14,000 to 70,000. Hospitals and physician practices have spent billions of dollars on training programs, boot camps, apps, flashcards and practice drills to prepare for the conversion, which has been postponed three times since the original date in 2011. With the move to ICD-10, the one code for suturing an artery will become 195 codes, designating every single artery, among other variables, according to OptumInsight, a unit of UnitedHealth Group Inc. A single code for a badly healed fracture could now translate to 2,595 different codes, the firm calculates. Each signals information including what bone was broken, as well as which side of the body it was on.
Propoenents says ICD-10 will help researchers better identify public-health problems, manage diseases and evaluate outcomes, and over time, will create a much more detailed body of data about patients' health—conveying a wealth of information in a single seven-digit code—and pave the way for changes in reimbursement as the nation moves toward value-based payment plans. "A clinician whose practice is filled with diabetic patients with multiple complications ought to get paid more for keeping them healthy than a clinician treating mostly cheerleaders," says Dr. Rogers. "ICD-10 will give us the precision to do that." As the changeover deadline approaches some fear a replay of the Affordable Care Act rollout debacle in 2013 that choked computer networks, delaying bills and claims for several months. Others recollect the end-of-century anxiety of Y2K, the Year 2000 computer bug that failed to materialize. "We're all hoping for the best and expecting the worst," says Sharon Ahearn. "I have built up what I call my war chest. That's to make sure we have enough working capital to see us through six to eight weeks of slow claims."
Propoenents says ICD-10 will help researchers better identify public-health problems, manage diseases and evaluate outcomes, and over time, will create a much more detailed body of data about patients' health—conveying a wealth of information in a single seven-digit code—and pave the way for changes in reimbursement as the nation moves toward value-based payment plans. "A clinician whose practice is filled with diabetic patients with multiple complications ought to get paid more for keeping them healthy than a clinician treating mostly cheerleaders," says Dr. Rogers. "ICD-10 will give us the precision to do that." As the changeover deadline approaches some fear a replay of the Affordable Care Act rollout debacle in 2013 that choked computer networks, delaying bills and claims for several months. Others recollect the end-of-century anxiety of Y2K, the Year 2000 computer bug that failed to materialize. "We're all hoping for the best and expecting the worst," says Sharon Ahearn. "I have built up what I call my war chest. That's to make sure we have enough working capital to see us through six to eight weeks of slow claims."
I have the sneaking suspicion that this is going to backfire massively. They'll have bad data hither and yon as overworked medicos end up entering the wrong codes (hey, it's a broken femur, who cares which side?) as often as the right ones. They won't get the supposed benefits of more granular data because the data will be so screwed up that they won't be able to draw any conclusions at all.
Nothing like an industry standard to screw things up on a grand scale.
A thousand pounds of wood moving at 300 feet per minute. Don't get in the way.
a hillbilly making minimum wage can look up a car part out of tens of millions in about 3 seconds, with 3-4 questions, using a green screen terminal connected via dialup
your nurse sister has a binder
I don't think the number of codes is the problem
To properly bill this LSD poisoning (initial encounter), we need to know whether it was accidental, intentional self-harm, assault, or undetermined:
http://www.icd10data.com/ICD10...
http://www.icd10data.com/ICD10...
http://www.icd10data.com/ICD10...
http://www.icd10data.com/ICD10...
No sympathy.
This was a well publicized deadline with plenty of infrastructure money provided up front. Oh -- your HMO or physician practice spent all that money on something else. I guess that must be the evil federal government's fault.
---- The above post was generated by the Turing Institute. Maybe.
The codes make it easier to sniff out fraud.
More like, this Byzantine complexity makes it easier to delay payment and deny coverage.
The ACA was the insurance industry's wet dream. Obama, the dems in congress, and far too many of the republicans, handed it to them on a sliver platter.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Will costs increase because doctors now have to hire more people to encode patient's charts? They already have at least one, very expensive, employee dedicated to that now. This is a typical government response to a fake problem...more rules, more crap, more costs.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.