Electronic Health Records

Policy & Regulation News

Hospital Groups Call for Avoiding Another ICD-10 Delay

By Kyle Murphy, PhD

Hospital groups have written a letter to leaders of Congress asking the latter to avoid another ICD-10 delay.

- With less than ten months to go before healthcare organizations and providers need to comply with most recent ICD-10 transition deadline, the standoff between proponents and opponents of the 2015 ICD-10 compliance date is increasing in intensity.

Health Info Exchange

A band of hospital and health system associations have written a letter to leaders of Congress asking the latter to avoid another ICD-10 delay. A total of eight industry groups have undersigned the petition:

  • America’s Essential Hospitals
  • American Hospital Association
  • Association of American Medical Colleges
  • Catholic Health Association of the United States
  • Children’s Hospital Association
  • National Association of Psychiatric Health Systems
  • Premier healthcare alliance
  • VHA Inc.

“As the organizations representing more than 5,000 hospitals and health systems across the country, we strongly support the announced October 1, 2015 ICD-10 compliance date and oppose any steps to delay,” the organizations write. “Recent ICD-10 implementation delays have been disruptive and costly for hospitals and health systems, as well as to health care delivery innovation, payment reform, public health, and health care payment.”

The letter to Representatives John Boehner (R-OH) and Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senators Harry Reid (D-NV) and Mitch McConnell (R-KY) specifically recalls the setbacks resulting from the most recent one-year delay of ICD-10 implementation from 2014 to 2015:

  • Will HIEs Play a Role in the Future of Interoperability?
  • AMA Calls for Stability, Simplicity in Future MIPS Scoring
  • AHA Explains Industry Challenges for EHR Interoperability
  • How must providers react to the new meaningful use timeline?
  • Choosing the Right EHR Vendor in 2014 and Beyond
  • Usability Regulation Bypassed by Some ONC-Certified EHRs
  • Should Meaningful Users Choose Flexibility or Exception?
  • Ophthalmology database to boost eye disease data analytics
  • EHR implementation preparation checklist for small practices
  • Preparations fundamental to a successful EMR implementation
  • FCC considers new spectrum for medical communications
  • Does MACRA Implementation Require New EHR Safe Harbors?
  • EHR Implementation Weakens Productivity, Improves Revenue
  • What does patient experience mean to accountable care, ACOs?
  • Problems with Cerner EHR Replacement Persist at Banner Health
  • Inefficient health IT costs hospitals $8.3 billion a year
  • CMS Administrator Seema Verma Pledges to Cut Provider Burden
  • Health IT Safety Collaborative Can Aid EHR Use, Patient Safety
  • Oregon Health System Preps for Epic EHR Implementation
  • Safety net ACOs lack necessary EHR functionality
  • CMS Proposes Meaningful Use Changes to Promote Interoperability
  • Michigan HIE Links Six Midwest Health Information Exchanges
  • ACO Health IT, EHR Use May Point to Needed Policy Changes
  • Allscripts Recovering From EHR Downtime After Ransomware Attack
  • How Epic Systems Is Advancing Healthcare Interoperability
  • MU Health Care Extends Cerner EHR to 100-Bed Community Hospital
  • Patient Matching Strategy Should Leverage Smartphones, Biometrics
  • Impact of 2014 CEHRT on EHR modules, users
  • Data normalization, analytics are key to advancing HIE: Q&A
  • Data analytics for specialty practices
  • Are Physician Groups on Board with ICD-10 Transition?
  • FL District Court Dismisses Epic Systems False Claims Act Case
  • MGMA Calls for CMS to Extend Meaningful Use Reporting Period
  • EHR Use-Related Malpractice Claims Increased Over Past Decade
  • CMS Wants Meaningful Use to Put Providers Back in Charge
  • Self-Reported Health Data Improves Outcomes in Cancer Study
  • Cerner, Duke Research Develop EHR-Integrated Cardiac Risk App
  • How is health IT improving approaches to patient engagement?
  • Adopting OB-GYN EHR technology
  • MIPS Requirements for Physicians Under Proposed MACRA Rule
  • How do EHRs affect interactions between providers, patients?
  • Should health information exchange be deemed a public good?
  • Pediatric Standards May Advance Meaningful Use Requirements
  • OCHIN Partnership to Improve EHR Use for Epic, NextGen Users
  • Expand EHR knowledge for Stage 2 meaningful use success: Q&A
  • Mercy Partners with GoHealth Urgent Care, Extends Epic EHR
  • SGR repeal, ICD-10 delay legislation passes in the House
  • Congressional Hearing to Assess DoD-VA EHR Interoperability
  • Industry Experts Provide Meaningful Use Summaries, Analysis
  • AMIA Urges Reset on Electronic Clinical Quality Measures
  • Has CMS shortchanged eligible hospitals of EHR incentives?
  • Using Health Information Exchange to Reduce Strain on EDs
  • CIO series: Atlantic General’s Barbara Riddell
  • North America may see 75 million telehealth visits in 2014
  • mHealth market to grow by 61%, will hit $26 billion by 2017
  • Will Senate Bill Help to End the EHR Incentive Programs?
  • June 4: CMS to host ICD-10 coding basics call for providers
  • How Interoperability, Care Coordination Work to Improve ACOs
  • AHRQ Report: EHR Integration Assists Lean Production Design
  • CHIME $1M Challenge Pushes for National Patient Identifier
  • Should ONC decertify EHRs that block interoperability?
  • Why should small practices choose cloud-based EHR?
  • Developing physician EHR adoption strategies: CIO series
  • QR codes on vaccines help collect EHR data, reduce errors
  • PA Health Information Exchange Adds New Member HIOs
  • EHR best practices: Considering a new EHR vendor, system
  • Blue Button Expands Access to Include CCDs, OpenNotes
  • NCHS reports physician EHR adoption numbers
  • Case Study Supports EHR-Integrated Patient Generated Health Data
  • EHR Adoption Driving Need to Update Human Research Rules
  • Do Certified EHR Technology, Alerts Risk Patient Safety?
  • CVS announces Epic EHR partnership with four providers
  • What’s next after Mostashari’s last day at the ONC?
  • Three Recent Major Health Information Exchange Developments
  • AMA, CHIME, AMDIS recommend changes to FDASIA report
  • PHRs to reduce health disparities, collect longitudinal data?
  • Four ways IT can facilitate ACO success
  • Realizing the Benefits of Clinical Documentation Improvement
  • Consumer advocates opposing Medicare Audit Improvement Act
  • EHNAC and NH-ISAC Align on Health Information Protection
  • The Week Ahead in Health IT Interoperability: Nov. 16-22
  • CMS Seeks Specific Comments on Stage 3 Meaningful Use Rule
  • 3 Steps for Ensuring Provider Success under MACRA
  • EHR Use May Not be Adequate for Precision Medicine Research
  • How a Full-Scale ICD-10 Test Helped Flag Transition Issues
  • Hawai’i growing out HIE program
  • ONC issues request for meaningful use accreditors
  • Will Minnesota’s 2015 EHR Interoperability Mandate Work?
  • The ICD-10 Coding Transition Deadline is Only 99 Days Away
  • Will AAFP Agreement Help Facilitate EHR Vendor Selection?
  • ONC to accelerate meaningful use with State Challenge 2.0
  • Pioneering ACO with Epic EHR, database at Atrius: CIO Series
  • NCQA drafts updated guidelines for PCMHs, requests comment
  • 2014 Certification Criteria for Ambulatory, Inpatient EHR
  • Health Data Interoperability Needs Information Blocking to End
  • Clinical Workflow Progress Vital to Boost Health IT Quality
  • Cancer Screening Test Vendor to Launch Epic EHR Implementation
  • Dec. 31: EHR Incentive Program reporting deadline
  • HHS tackles EHR, data disaster preparedness through HIE
  • 90% of Ohio hospitals take part in health information exchange
  • The delay added billions of dollars in extra costs. Many of our members had to quickly reconfigure systems and processes that were prepared to use ICD-10 back to ICD-9. Newly trained coders who graduated from ICD-10 focused programs were unprepared for use of the older code set and needed to be retrained back to using ICD-9. Further, training of existing coders needed to be repeated given the one-year delay. This results in a doubling of costs that are not productive. A further delay would only add additional costs as existing investments would be further wasted and future costs would grow.

    The advocacy by the hospital and health system associations comes shortly after Medical Society of the State of New York and Texas Medical Association called on their members to persuade Congress to implement two-year ICD-10 delay until 2017. Those provider association have highlighted the negative financial implications for physician practices if an industry-wide ICD-10 implementation failed on Oct. 1, 2015.  The letter’s timing of December 5 also coincides with the message delivered by the Coalition for ICD-10 following remarks by American Medical Association President Robert Wah, MD, that contained arguments against and jokes about new code set.

    Based on the types of organizations working in favor and against an additional ICD-10, a division clearly exists between hospitals and hospitals and physician practices. While advocates for the latter reiterate the readiness of their constituents, their counterparts see nothing bad negative consequences ahead for their members. And this division likely to puts to be any lingering doubts about the forces behind the most recent ICD-10 delay.



    Sign up to continue reading and gain Free Access to all our resources.

    Sign up for our free newsletter and join 60,000 of your peers to stay up to date with tips and advice on:

    EHR Optimization
    EHR Interoperability

    White Papers, Webcasts, Featured Articles and Exclusive Interviews

    Our privacy policy

    no, thanks

    Continue to site...