- Event Log Management & Compliance Best Practices: For Government & Healthcare Industry Sectors
- New World Order: Effectively Securing Healthcare Data Through Secure Information Exchanges
- Beyond the EHR: Seamlessly Connecting Nurses and Physicians Using an EHR-Extender (EHR-e)
- The Power of User Virtualization: Meeting Meaningful Use, Optimizing IT and Clinical Productivity
- Case Study: Blood Systems Expands Remote Access Connectivity to Prepare for Disaster
The Medical Group Management Association (MGMA) wants the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to do more than delay ICD-10 implementation.
In a March 1 letter to HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelius, MGMA president and CEO Susan Turney outlines some steps that should be added to the ICD-10 timeline that would inject some due diligence to the process.
[Download: MGMA letter to HHS with ICD-10 recommendations]
Those steps would be:
- "Complete a comprehensive cost benefit analysis."
- "Pilot test ICD-10."
- "Analyze the administrative and financial impact of overlapping initiatives."
- "Evaluate additional code set approaches."
- "Stagger implementation dates."
- "Develop appropriate crosswalks."
- "Require Certification."
Note nowhere in this letter does the MGMA express any opposition to ICD-10 implementation. Apparently they think it may be a perfectly fine code set. But let's make sure first with cost benefit analysis, evaluations and tests. And maybe we should look at other options.
It pretty much sounds like a plan to delay ICD-10-CM/PCS until dies of old age.
Carl Natale blogs regularly at ICD10Watch.com.