AHIMA article clarifies need for ICD-10 changes; dispels misconceptions

Since the announcement of the ICD-10 delay earlier this year, many healthcare providers have questioned the need to continue spending on staff and physician training. Additionally, some questioned whether ICD-10 would be implemented at all, and the transition would simply be made to the ICD-11 coding. An article in the current issue of the Journal of AHIMA addresses some of the most common concerns surrounding ICD-10 and intends to dispel several misconceptions.

In Myths of ICD-10-CM/PCS, Sue Bowman, MJ, RHIA, CCS, American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA) senior director of coding policy and compliance, uses evidence to address the following mistruths:

·        the idea that replacement of ICD-9-CM is not a necessity;

·        the increase in the number of codes from ICD-9 to ICD-10 increases the difficulty of using the new codeset;

·        SNOMED CT or ICD-11 represent viable alternatives to ICD-10-CM/PCS implementation.

“The transition to ICD-10 continues to be inevitable and time sensitive,” said AHIMA CEO Lynne Thomas Gordon, MBA, RHIA, CAE. “As the healthcare industry experiences an additional delay in ICD-10 implementation, now is the ideal time to rebut ICD-10 myths that continue to percolate.”