Electronic Health Records

Policy & Regulation News

EHR Optimization a Focus of Upcoming ICD-10 Updates

A new guide aims to prepare healthcare practices for the next phase of ICD-10 implementation, which includes new codes and regulations on unspecified codes that will require certain EHR optimization efforts.

By Jacqueline Belliveau

- Many healthcare providers, whether reluctantly or not, have already implemented ICD-10 coding procedures and continued to provide care with the system in place. However, like many aspects of the industry, providers will need to prepare for upcoming updates and changes to ICD-10 on October 1, 2016.

EHR optimization key to next phase of ICD-10 implementation

To assist healthcare stakeholders, the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA) has released a guide on how to manage ICD-10 post payment reviews and unspecified codes. Per the guidance, healthcare practices should also evaluate their EHR systems to ensure that coding errors have been reported. Many EHR systems are designed to suggest the correct ICD-10 codes, but some stakeholders have noticed that these systems are not perfect.

“While the correct level of ICD-10 code specificity has always been required for National Coverage Determinations, Local Coverage Determinations, other claims edits, prepayment reviews, and prior authorization requests, physicians were granted amnesty from post payment reviews due to unspecified codes,” wrote Christina Lee, MHS, RHIA, CCS, CPC, in the AHIMA newsletter.

Once the grace period ends on October 1, healthcare stakeholders should realign their ICD-10 resources to focus on unspecified ICD-10 codes, which could cause delays in claims reimbursement, explained Lee. Even though ICD-10 hinges on accuracy, there will be cases where providers will need to use an unspecified code.

  • Massachusetts HIE primes for October go-live
  • Study reveals prevailing lack of HIE sustainability
  • ICD-10 Coding Concerns Dispelled with 5 CMS Facts
  • Health Information Exchange Focus of Patient Matching Event
  • EHR nightmares: When EHR adoption, implementation run awry
  • Tailored Physician EHR Use Necessary for Evolving Industry
  • CMS, ONC Expand Explanation of Upcoming Meaningful Use Plans
  • Are EHR Vendor Contracts Hindering Patient Safety Research?
  • Meaningful use of EHR systems begins with meaningful training
  • How hospital mergers affect healthcare reform expectations
  • Increased Physician EHR Use Tied to Medication Adherence
  • Certified EHR: Breaking down the ONC fact sheet
  • Data migration can leave your information vulnerable
  • UT law professor examines Utah health data breach
  • HELP Committee Drafts Bill To Drive Patient-Centered EHR Use
  • Cal. focuses on HIE, vaccine portal to spur meaningful use
  • CMS Details 2018 Meaningful Use Payment Adjustments
  • New Minn. Bill Seeks to Remove EHR Interoperability Mandate
  • Summarizing New Streamlined Clinical Quality Measures at CMS
  • Are Meaningful Use Incentives Worth a Provider’s Investment?
  • EHR and the cloud: Expectations for Hospital Cloud Forum
  • When Health Information Exchange Fails, Providers Often Pay
  • WEDI Seeks ICD-10 Readiness Survey Responses from Stakeholders
  • ONC Announces More Than $36 Million in New Health IT Funding
  • 4 hospitals, 50 EPs have attested to Stage 2 Meaningful Use
  • How can big data, analytics make healthcare data meaningful?
  • VA Awards $19.6M Contract for Veteran Care Access Mobile App
  • Role of Integrated EHR Technology in Solving Fragmented Care
  • Need for Continuing Education to Maximize Physician EHR Use
  • Funding for CHIP quality reporting program set to expire
  • Health IT Makes Strides Toward True Interoperability
  • Tenn. allowed speedy EHR access during meningitis emergency
  • CIO series: Clarion’s Jim Confer
  • 5 EHR predictions for 2013
  • KBCore wins ONC Patient Safety Reporting System Challenge
  • HIMSS: Don’t delay schedule for Stage 2 Meaningful Use
  • Most Significant Epic, Cerner Health IT Achievements of 2017
  • AMIA Urges ONC Update 2015 Interoperability Roadmap, Standards
  • AHRQ dashboard makes meaningful use easier for providers
  • Telehealth roundup: Arkansas, California improve remote care
  • Study: CPOE, e-prescribing don’t meet provider expectations
  • AHA on Medicare Cuts: Don’t Do More with Less, Just Do Better
  • Telehealth for chronic disease patients improves satisfaction
  • Independent physicians decrease due to demands of new technology, decreased profits
  • mHealth apps will be worth $26B by 2017 and reach 1.7B users
  • DirectTrust’s Patient-Centered HIE to Boost Patient Engagement
  • AHRQ Announces Health IT Research Funding Opportunities
  • ONC 2017 Budget Focuses on EHR Interoperability, Transparency
  • EHR Replacement Trend Expands to Emergency Departments
  • Telemedicine gets increasingly popular with insurance plans
  • Senate Committee Tackles EHR Interoperability, Data Blocking
  • Cerner Makes Key Revenue Cycle Management Hire
  • 6 Areas to Watch in Health Information Exchange
  • Healthcare Claims Data for Sale Under New CMS Regulation
  • New fiber line links Montana HIE and rural health
  • 50% of patients who track, share health data say it boosts results
  • Breaking Down the Health IT Impacts of Stage 3 Meaningful Use
  • How Business Decisions Challenge EHR Integration Efforts?
  • How the EHR Selection Process Influences Specialist EHR Use
  • How Do Different Health Industry Experts View Data Blocking?
  • Qualities of a viable EHR patient portal
  • EHR Replacement Q&A: Lack of support, training made us switch
  • ACP: “Aggressive” Stage 2 requirements are counterproductive
  • Michigan HIE Links Six Midwest Health Information Exchanges
  • HITPC moves for better EHR-supported HIE in Stage 3
  • Allscripts files complaint after failed NYC bid
  • As time runs out, is ICD-10 ‘not useful’ for data analytics?
  • NYU Lutheran Launches Epic EHR to Boost Patient Care
  • NSF awards Health Fidelity big data EHR research grant
  • EHR vendor selection considerations should look beyond meaningful use
  • Flex-IT Act aims to reduce meaningful use reporting in 2015
  • Mining Electronic Health Records Refines Diabetes Diagnoses
  • Extended safe harbor to aid meaningful use, interoperability
  • Moving from EHR implementation to EHR adoption
  • Coalition Questions Authority of ONC Health IT Oversight
  • Bulk of wasted DOD, VA iEHR money went to support contracts
  • Open notes boosts patient engagement ahead of Stage 2 Meaningful Use
  • Lack of ICD-10 Readiness Leads Multiple States to Crosswalks
  • 19% of patients think online doc ratings are very important
  • Interoperable Home Health Technology Poised for Explosive Growth
  • Is Creating an App Culture the Key to EHR Interoperability?
  • CMS Provides Meaningful Use Penalties, Payments Update
  • Midwestern states expand HIE with Direct secure messaging
  • Why are payers concerned with patient engagement strategies?
  • Yale to Integrate State Prescription Drug Data into Epic EHR
  • CVS, Epic Systems team up to bring EHRs to retail clinics
  • VA makes progress on oldest benefits claims in massive queue
  • Health Information Exchange in Michigan Extends Services
  • 4 EHR Best Practices for Improving Clinical Workflows
  • Solo Practitioners Exempt from EHR Implementation in Minnesota
  • EHR analytics can identify diabetes earlier and in real time
  • Epic takes a 10% bite out of ambulatory EHR market
  • What EHR interoperability means to the patient experience
  • Health Data Exchange Vital to Quality Care at Lower Cost
  • Interoperable, Standard Health IT Key for Quality Improvement
  • HIMSS recommends changes to Stage 2 Meaningful Use
  • Surescripts National Record Locator Service Continues to Grow
  • Understanding the role of nurse informaticists in healthcare
  • Meaningful patient engagement through EHR, social media
  • Stakeholders Seek Common Changes to Quality Payment Program
  • “When sufficient clinical information is not known or available about a particular health condition to assign a more specific code, it is acceptable to report the appropriate unspecified code (for example, a diagnosis of pneumonia has been determined but the specific type has not been determined),” explained CMS in an ICD-10 Overview document.

    AHIMA advised that healthcare practices start by performing internal audits that identify and track patterns in unspecified clinical documentation and diagnosis code assignments.

    If the analysis shows that more specific ICD-10-CM (diagnosis) codes could have been used based on the clinical documentation, then practices should conduct trainings on proper coding techniques. On the other hand, if analysis shows that incomplete medical documentation resulted in unspecified codes, practices should refresh clinicians on appropriate documentation procedures.

    “While there are a few instances where usage of unspecified ICD-10-CM codes may be appropriate, widespread use of numerous unspecified codes should be the exception, not the rule,” stated Lee. “Practices submitting unspecified ICD-10 codes after October 1, 2016 may potentially experience an increase in post payment audits and quality reporting errors. As audits increase, so will payer requests for medical records and clinical documentation.”

    Additionally, healthcare practices may want to consider hiring a certified coding professional to assist with updating ICD-10 coding procedures and compliance policies, explained Lee. A coding specialist can help providers assess EHR code assignments, pinpoint software glitches, and provide ICD-10 training for staff.

    AHIMA noted that many practices may not be able to afford a full-time coding specialist, but there are cost-conscious ways to employ a professional. Practices could collaborate with other providers to share the cost, hire a certified specialist via a contract or a consulting arrangement, allow a current employee to complete coding certification, or employ an interim coding professional.

    The guide stated that common coding glitches include codes for motor vehicle accidents, joint replacements, and traumatic fractures.

    Looking forward, AHIMA predicts that more healthcare providers will experience challenges with the upcoming release of new codes as CMS ends the three-year code freeze. Practices may also face difficulties with statistical reporting because unspecified ICD-10 codes from 2016 will be compared to more specific codes in 2017.

    “A proactive approach to mitigate unspecified documentation, coding, and billing is the best remedy for post-grace period concerns,” reported Lee. “Now is the time for practices to consider hiring credentialed coding professionals and/or partnering with coding consultants. HIM professionals will become increasingly valuable as physicians prepare for the new wave of coding challenges ahead.”

    Assessing EHR systems and ICD-10 capabilities may be a worthwhile task for healthcare providers as the new phase approaches. A recent WEDI survey found that the majority of healthcare stakeholders surveyed stated that EHR and practice management systems facilitated a smooth transition to ICD-10 implementation.

    As the healthcare industry continues to change, ICD-10 is no exception to that rule. However, practices could benefit from AHIMA’s guide on the approaching updates, especially as EHR systems are restructured to accommodate more ICD-10 codes.

    Dig Deeper:

    Impact of ICD-10 on Smaller Provider EHR Use, Reimbursement

    Factors Contributing to Hospital EHR Implementation Success