The report cited how the AMA's “successful advocacy” has persuaded the CMS to hold back on ICD-10 implementation for a decade. The CMS has scheduled ICD-10 implementation for October 2014—just a few months before the World Health Organization is set to consider an ICD-11 update in May 2015. With this timing in mind, the AMA board was directed to evaluate the feasibility of skipping ICD-10 implementation altogether and going straight to ICD-11.
“Our AMA harbors serious concerns and reservations with the significant burden of the ICD-10 mandate and will continue to convey these points to policymakers in Washington,” the report stated. “However, given the even greater complexities and uncertainties with moving directly from ICD-9 to ICD-11, the Board of Trustees believes skipping ICD-10 and moving directly to ICD-11 is fraught with its own pitfalls and therefore, based on current information available, is not recommended.”
Among the concerns cited in the report was that it could take as long as 20 years before a U.S. version of ICD-11 is implemented.
“ICD-9 is outdated today, and continuing to use the outdated codes limits the ability to use diagnosis codes to advance the understanding of diseases and treatments, identify quality care, drive better treatments for populations of patients and develop new payment delivery models,” the report stated.
The report also cited an argument for waiting that notes how implementation of either ICD-10 or ICD-11 “will be significant and costly,” so there is some logic in going through this process only once.
“A large difficulty with implementing ICD-10 involves the use of outdated practice management and other electronic systems that cannot accommodate the ICD-10 structure change and need to be updated/replaced,” the report stated. “The electronic system changes to implement ICD-11 will be more significant, but they will be significant from either ICD-10 or ICD-9.”
The report also noted how ICD-10 implementation is a divisive issue for the healthcare industry and that many stakeholders, including “government agencies, researchers, large payers, large health system providers and public health entities,” support the conversion to the new codes.
The CMS declared that Oct. 1, 2014, will be the implementation date for ICD-10 and that no further delays would be authorized. At the recent annual conference of the Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society in New Orleans this past March, the audience applauded when acting CMS Administrator Marilyn Tavenner said the agency was holding to that date.
“Are we going to delay ICD-10? The answer is no,” Tavenner said in an announcement that drew cheers from the audience.
Follow Andis Robeznieks on Twitter: @MHARobeznieks
