My conversations with hospital CIOs at HIMSS (last week) were really interesting. Many of them believe the delay will increase the total spend to prepare for ICD-10 because they will likely lose some momentum until the final delay is announced. They may also have some rework for activities that were dependent on the original dates.

Great discussion, thanks for the comments.

Heather Haugen PhD
Corporate VP of Research- The Breakaway Group
Director of HIT- University of Colorado

Greg,

You actually make the case for ICD-10 perfectly:

“But what is the essential benefit behind ICD-10? I would contend it is the force that drives improvements in documentation, and THIS will continue with or without a firm ICD-10 deadline. Our leadership has seen THAT writing on the wall and the message is clear. Improved documentation will drive improved results and increased reimbursements.”

Your documentation improvements are only grabbing the reimbursement that you organization has been leaving on the table, likely not catching complications and comorbidities or being able to assign higher reimbursement DRGs. The current reimbursement system is based on the broken ICD-9 system, which has literally run out of codes and can’t capture the latest technologies or clinical diagnoses in the record. ICD-10 will allow providers to be better reimbursed based on the real clinical picture, with its finer granularity.

The benefits also extended to patients. Here’s a link to a discussion on my blog about how ICD-10 can positively impact patient care:
http://mcod.us/yBVDgb

I read many publications that state a delay in ICD-10 will cost providers more than keeping to the original date, but most of this argument is coming from vendors and consultants who have a vested interest in keeping 10/01/13.

From my perspective the delay is a benefit, although like a worn Band-Aid I would welcome its quick removal.

Our organization is probably in the middle of the pack in regards to ICD-10 readiness. We have begun investigation into Education, IT and Payer readiness and associated workflows. This is a start and we still have a ton of work to do to be properly prepared.

But what is the essential benefit behind ICD-10? I would contend it is the force that drives improvements in documentation, and THIS will continue with or without a firm ICD-10 deadline. Our leadership has seen THAT writing on the wall and the message is clear. Improved documentation will drive improved results and increased reimbursements.

When ICD-10 does become “real”, we will be well prepared and our financial impact swing will be minimal because we have focused on quality documentation that fit ICD-10 standards. We will also keep a keen eye on ICD-11 to assure we pave the road towards smooth adoption of that standard in the possibility it becomes a working reality within the next 8 years.

If you are a provider that has invested tons of cash into coder education, I am sorry but you may have to spend that money again if the delay is substantial. It is likely that coders will lose this knowledge without regular ICD-10 practice.

So my question to you (random web traveler to come across this lonely little diatribe), what are the negative implications of a delayed ICD-10? Also, what factors in MU2 rely on ICD-10?

Peace!