Cargando…
ICD-10 procedure codes produce transition challenges
The transition of procedure coding from ICD-9-CM-Vol-3 to ICD-10-PCS has generated problems for the medical community at large resulting from the lack of clarity required to integrate two non-congruent coding systems. We hypothesized that quantifying these issues with network topology analyses offer...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Medical Informatics Association
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5961828/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29888037 |
_version_ | 1783324790029811712 |
---|---|
author | Boyd, Andrew D. Li, Jianrong ‘John’ Kenost, Colleen Zaim, Samir Rachid Krive, Jacob Mittal, Manish Satava, Richard A. Burton, Michael Smith, Jacob Lussier, Yves A. |
author_facet | Boyd, Andrew D. Li, Jianrong ‘John’ Kenost, Colleen Zaim, Samir Rachid Krive, Jacob Mittal, Manish Satava, Richard A. Burton, Michael Smith, Jacob Lussier, Yves A. |
author_sort | Boyd, Andrew D. |
collection | PubMed |
description | The transition of procedure coding from ICD-9-CM-Vol-3 to ICD-10-PCS has generated problems for the medical community at large resulting from the lack of clarity required to integrate two non-congruent coding systems. We hypothesized that quantifying these issues with network topology analyses offers a better understanding of the issues, and therefore we developed solutions (online tools) to empower hospital administrators and researchers to address these challenges. Five topologies were identified: “identity”(I), “class-to-subclass”(C2S), “subclass-toclass”(S2C), “convoluted(C)”, and “no mapping”(NM). The procedure codes in the 2010 Illinois Medicaid dataset (3,290 patients, 116 institutions) were categorized as C=55%, C2S=40%, I=3%, NM=2%, and S2C=1%. Majority of the problematic and ambiguous mappings (convoluted) pertained to operations in ophthalmology cardiology, urology, gyneco-obstetrics, and dermatology. Finally, the algorithms were expanded into a user-friendly tool to identify problematic topologies and specify lists of procedural codes utilized by medical professionals and researchers for mitigating error-prone translations, simplifying research, and improving quality.http://www.lussiergroup.org/transition-to-ICD10PCS |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5961828 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | American Medical Informatics Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-59618282018-06-08 ICD-10 procedure codes produce transition challenges Boyd, Andrew D. Li, Jianrong ‘John’ Kenost, Colleen Zaim, Samir Rachid Krive, Jacob Mittal, Manish Satava, Richard A. Burton, Michael Smith, Jacob Lussier, Yves A. AMIA Jt Summits Transl Sci Proc Articles The transition of procedure coding from ICD-9-CM-Vol-3 to ICD-10-PCS has generated problems for the medical community at large resulting from the lack of clarity required to integrate two non-congruent coding systems. We hypothesized that quantifying these issues with network topology analyses offers a better understanding of the issues, and therefore we developed solutions (online tools) to empower hospital administrators and researchers to address these challenges. Five topologies were identified: “identity”(I), “class-to-subclass”(C2S), “subclass-toclass”(S2C), “convoluted(C)”, and “no mapping”(NM). The procedure codes in the 2010 Illinois Medicaid dataset (3,290 patients, 116 institutions) were categorized as C=55%, C2S=40%, I=3%, NM=2%, and S2C=1%. Majority of the problematic and ambiguous mappings (convoluted) pertained to operations in ophthalmology cardiology, urology, gyneco-obstetrics, and dermatology. Finally, the algorithms were expanded into a user-friendly tool to identify problematic topologies and specify lists of procedural codes utilized by medical professionals and researchers for mitigating error-prone translations, simplifying research, and improving quality.http://www.lussiergroup.org/transition-to-ICD10PCS American Medical Informatics Association 2018-05-18 /pmc/articles/PMC5961828/ /pubmed/29888037 Text en ©2018 AMIA - All rights reserved. This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose |
spellingShingle | Articles Boyd, Andrew D. Li, Jianrong ‘John’ Kenost, Colleen Zaim, Samir Rachid Krive, Jacob Mittal, Manish Satava, Richard A. Burton, Michael Smith, Jacob Lussier, Yves A. ICD-10 procedure codes produce transition challenges |
title | ICD-10 procedure codes produce transition challenges |
title_full | ICD-10 procedure codes produce transition challenges |
title_fullStr | ICD-10 procedure codes produce transition challenges |
title_full_unstemmed | ICD-10 procedure codes produce transition challenges |
title_short | ICD-10 procedure codes produce transition challenges |
title_sort | icd-10 procedure codes produce transition challenges |
topic | Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5961828/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29888037 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT boydandrewd icd10procedurecodesproducetransitionchallenges AT lijianrongjohn icd10procedurecodesproducetransitionchallenges AT kenostcolleen icd10procedurecodesproducetransitionchallenges AT zaimsamirrachid icd10procedurecodesproducetransitionchallenges AT krivejacob icd10procedurecodesproducetransitionchallenges AT mittalmanish icd10procedurecodesproducetransitionchallenges AT satavaricharda icd10procedurecodesproducetransitionchallenges AT burtonmichael icd10procedurecodesproducetransitionchallenges AT smithjacob icd10procedurecodesproducetransitionchallenges AT lussieryvesa icd10procedurecodesproducetransitionchallenges |