Despite months of assurances to the contrary, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced in mid-February they were indefinitely postponing implementation of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10). The changeover was originally scheduled to take effect October 1, 2013.
“ICD-10 codes are important to many positive improvements in our health care system,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius in a press release. “We have heard from many in the provider community who have concerns about the administrative burdens they face in the years ahead. We are committing to work with the provider community to reexamine the pace at which HHS and the nation implement these important improvements to our health care system.”
No New Date Set
As of this writing, the only thing that has been officially announced is that a new compliance date will be set. The information released so far does not give a timeline for when the new implementation date might be announced. They have only said that they will set the new compliance date “as they go forward.”
“With the implementation of Meaningful Use, e-Prescribing, and other initiatives, physicians are being saddled with, there are many compliance issues for 2012 and 2013,” says Antanya Chung, CPC, CPC-I, CRHC, CCP, director of practice management at the ACR. “Including ICD-10 would be the final straw and this could be the motive behind postponing it.”
She notes that CMS traditionally releases new codes on October 1 every year. Although they haven’t yet released a new compliance date, it seems likely that it will have to be at least one year later, possibly more.
“CMS does see the necessity for implementing the new coding mechanism,” says Chung. “This is a positive improvement going forward for the entire system. This is not a statement that it isn’t going to happen, just that they understand the burdens and concerns of the providers and will reexamine the compliance date.”
Continue Transition Planning
Because of this, and the uncertainties surrounding when the new date might be, it is important that practices continue with their transition plans. Neither those who have diligently worked toward implementation, nor those who haven’t, can afford to become complacent.
“CMS and the other third party payers can flip on their switch and move forward with implementation at any time,” says Chung. “Practices should continue to prepare for the future just in case they don’t get a two- or three-year reprieve but instead receive only a few months.”
