- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bizarre new ICD-10 codes
Posted on 10/17/15 at 7:23 am to Tigris
Posted on 10/17/15 at 7:23 am to Tigris
The key is medical treatment and advancements for surpass the specificity allowed in ICD10. The granularity of information will help enhance research and analysis as well. Most of it is a non issue. What will also help is the booming transparency of information to the consumers of healthcare and this will purchasers of healthcare in the long run. The overall variability in healthcare quality is simplify unacceptable.
0
Posted on 10/17/15 at 7:26 am to WAR TIGER
quote:
Hell, they even want us to clarify if a person's obesity is due to bad genetics or high caloric intake!!!!!! How the hell does that help me fix a femur?????
Haha, I just code the "due to excess calories" one every time.
I haven't found the transition to be that bad, honestly. Some of the surgeons I hear are having a rough time though. I think it's affected them the most.
Posted on 10/17/15 at 9:34 am to SmackoverHawg
quote:
Just more bullshite we have to deal with that takes us away from patient care, increases overhead and hurts revenue.
I spent 5 minutes reading through codes on one patient yesterday. Our search tree brought me to the section of nun-suppurrative otitis media (and its 20 codes) instead of suppurrative OM and its 14 codes. I had to give up on our own EMR's attempt to search in favor of icd10data's to punch the number back in. I can't imagine seeing a private guy's volume rather than a resident volume.
Also, I've said it once before, but it really sucks for you FM folks who do any amount of OB more than anyone else- There are way too many damn codes to really learn or familiarize yourself with half of them.
Posted on 10/17/15 at 9:35 am to SmackoverHawg
Double post.
This post was edited on 10/17/15 at 9:36 am
Posted on 10/17/15 at 9:56 am to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
Correct. It's the WHO with input from the AMA and others
WHO came up with this?
That's what I'm asking.
Posted on 10/17/15 at 9:59 am to jennBN
quote:
So out of curiosity will all EMRs now have to be updated to ICD-10?
So, you're a nurse and this is the first you've heard of ICD-10 in relation to EMRs?
Posted on 10/17/15 at 10:00 am to LSUTANGERINE
quote:
Most auto convert.
The majority shouldn't auto-convert because there aren't many direct mappings. (Going from 13,000 to 68,000)
Posted on 10/17/15 at 10:01 am to stniaSxuaeG
Transition hasn't been that bad, really. Epic has made it reasonably smooth. I guess we'll see in the next few months how things go, especially with payments.
Posted on 10/17/15 at 10:05 am to snoozer
quote:
The ability for a doctor to code as he works is a boon for the insurance companies and the government.
That's the problem right there. ICD-10 makes it harder for doctors to code as they work.
The doctor and the third party payer just need to know the diagnosis and the treatment. I assume most doctors treat a broken leg from an auto accident the same way whether the patient was the driver or passenger. They don't change the course of treatment based on which driver was at fault or if the state screwed up and both drivers saw a green light. Insurers aren't going to pay one amount for a shark bite and another amount for a piranha bite.
A simpler system with fewer codes would make it easier for the doctors to code as they work. If we want to collect metadata, we should pay doctors to send in detailed reports with the identifying information redacted.
Posted on 10/17/15 at 10:07 am to tigerjjs
quote:
Transition hasn't been that bad, really. Epic has made it reasonably smooth. I guess we'll see in the next few months how things go, especially with payments.
If you use Epic from the provider side, you probably didn't see much of a change, as you should have been live on clinical dual coding for months now.
Posted on 10/17/15 at 10:57 am to Epic Cajun
The amount of government intrusion in the way I practice is really a pain in the arse. It's as if the government doesnt trust doctors to do what's best for their patients, so they will monitor every damn thing we do and make sure we document every minute detail...which takes time away from, well, actually treating the patient. The prestige of being a physician is not what it once was.
I'm seriously considering going "off the grid" and opening a cash only clinic. No appointment times. Just sign the ledger up front and I'll see you when the person ahead of you is done. I'll treat you, get you better, and document only what I need to help ME treat you next time.
I'm seriously considering going "off the grid" and opening a cash only clinic. No appointment times. Just sign the ledger up front and I'll see you when the person ahead of you is done. I'll treat you, get you better, and document only what I need to help ME treat you next time.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News