bhudson1

Archive for April, 2014|Monthly archive page

From ICD-10 to “ICDelay Again”: Meaningful Use 2.5

In Executive Leadership, Financial, Healthcare, Operational Excellence, Revenue Cycle Management on April 7, 2014 at 1:37 pm

The recent passing of the “Doc Fix” bill that delays the ICD-10 Compliance date at least a year to 2015 was surprising to many, due to the fact that ICD-10 was included in the bill. It was announced by CMS in February at HIMSS14 that ICD-10 would not be delayed; this in response to a February 12 American Medical Association (AMA) demand letter to repeal ICD-10 and other industry concerns. In a short matter of days, we went from ICD-10… to… ICDelay Again.
As the news and emotions have settled, there are some common themes that are developing:
1. The delay has provided “breathing room” for organizations to “get it right. Based on the previous deadline, CMS was going to provide grace period for those organizations not in compliance. Too many priorities and limited time has been a common theme in the healthcare industry. The added time will eliminate that need and give providers and payers the proper amount of time to set their organizations up for success.
2. There is a need to regroup and modify the plan. The rush to prepare for ICD-10 exposed many organizational weaknesses around, clinical documentation, operational effectiveness, productivity, audits, mapping, doc assessments, etc. that still need to be addressed.
3. There is a “lack of credibility” with CMS and the certainty that the new revised dates will not be achieved going forward. Millions of dollars have been spent in preparation, not to mention the time and resources put forth. The most dangerous concern to organizations that are experiencing “ICD-10 fatigue” – is that apathy and complacency might take hold while in delay mode.
There is something that can be done to ensure a delay doesn’t happen again and provide incentives for organizations to become compliant on time. Remove ICD-10 from the political football of “Doc Fix” bills and create Meaningful Use 2.5. Provide rewards for those organizations that implement ICD-10 sooner rather than later. Meaningful Use 2.5 would allow ICD-10 to be executed between the Stage 2 Information exchange and care coordination and the Stage 3 Improved Outcomes. The original principle for Meaningful Use was to set a “New Model of Care” and address “National Health Priorities” (www.healthit.gov). ICD-10 accelerates both of these principles. The most recent delay proves that it can happen again. Ensuring that ICD-10 is not tied to future legislation is imperative; making ICD-10 part of Meaningful Use ensures the principles surrounding our National health priorities are met. Linking ICD-10 to Meaningful Use would ensure credibility of the dates being met. This delay, and potential future delays, has negatively affected the industry – AGAIN.