Dataset Information

A narrative review of the impact of the transition to ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM/PCS.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The United States transitioned to the tenth version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) system (ICD-10) for mortality coding in 1999 and to the International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification and Procedure Coding System (ICD-10-CM/PCS) on October 1, 2015. The purpose of this study was to conduct a narrative literature review to better understand the impact of the implementation of ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS.

Materials and methods

We searched English-language articles in PubMed, Web of Science, and Business Source Complete and reviewed websites of relevant professional associations, government agencies, research groups, and ICD-10 news aggregators to identify literature on the impact of the ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS transition. We used Google to search for additional gray literature and used handsearching of the references of the most on-target articles to help ensure comprehensiveness.

Results

Impact areas reported in the literature include: productivity and staffing, costs, reimbursement, coding accuracy, mapping between ICD versions, morbidity and mortality surveillance, and patient care. With the exception of morbidity and mortality surveillance, quantitative studies describing the actual impact of the ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS implementation were limited and much of the literature was based on the ICD-10-CM/PCS transition rather than the earlier conversion to ICD-10 for mortality coding.

Discussion

This study revealed several gaps in the literature that limit the ability to draw reliable conclusions about the overall impact, positive or negative, of moving to ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS in the United States.

Conclusion

These knowledge gaps present an opportunity for future research and knowledge sharing and will be important to consider when planning for ICD-11.

SUBMITTER: Kusnoor SV

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7309233 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A narrative review of the impact of the transition to ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM/PCS.

Kusnoor Sheila V SV Blasingame Mallory N MN Williams Annette M AM DesAutels Spencer J SJ Su Jing J Giuse Nunzia Bettinsoli NB

JAMIA open 20191226 1

<h4>Objectives</h4>The United States transitioned to the tenth version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) system (ICD-10) for mortality coding in 1999 and to the International Classification of Diseases, Clinical Modification and Procedure Coding System (ICD-10-CM/PCS) on October 1, 2015. The purpose of this study was to conduct a narrative literature review to better understand the impact of the implementation of ICD-10/ICD-10-CM/PCS.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>We searched ...[more]

PMID: 32607494

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWe aimed to estimate the impact of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) coding transition on traumatic injury-related hospitalization trends among young adults across a geographically and demographically diverse group of U.S. states.MethodsInterrupted time series analyses were conducted using statewide inpatient databases from 12 states and including traumatic injury-related hospitalizations in adults aged 19-44?years in 2011-2017. Segmented regression models were used to estimate the impact of the October 2015 coding transition on external cause of injury (ECOI) completeness (percentage of hospitalizations with a documented ECOI code) and on population-level rates of injury-related hospitalizations by nature, intent, mechanism, and severity of injury.ResultsThe transition to ICD-10-CM was associated with a drop in ECOI completion in the transition month (-?3.7%; P?<?.0001), but there was no significant change in the positive trend in ECOI completion from the pre- to post-transition periods. There were significant increases post-transition in the measured rates of hospitalization for traumatic brain injury (TBI), unintentional injury, mild injury (injury severity score (ISS) <?9), and injuries caused by drowning, firearms, machinery, other pedestrian, suffocation, and unspecified mechanism. Conversely, there were significant decreases in October 2015 in the rates of hospitalization for assault, injuries of undetermined intent, injuries of moderate severity (ISS 9-15), and injuries caused by fire/burn, other pedal cyclist, other transportation, natural/environmental, and other specified mechanism. A significant increase in the percentage of hospitalizations classified as resulting from severe injury (ISS?>?15) was observed when the general equivalence mapping maximum severity method for converting ICD-10-CM codes to ICD-9-CM codes was used. State-specific results for the outcomes of ECOI completion and TBI-related hospitalization rates are provided in an online supplement.ConclusionsThe U.S. transition from ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM coding led to a significant decrease in ECOI completion and several significant changes in measured rates of injury-related hospitalizations by injury intent, mechanism, nature, and severity. The results of this study can inform the design and analysis of future traumatic injury-related health services research studies that use both ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM coded data.Level of evidenceII (Interrupted Time Series).

Project description:BACKGROUND:Implementation of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) in the U.S. on October 1, 2015 was a significant policy change with the potential to affect established injury morbidity trends. This study used data from a single state to demonstrate 1) the use of a statistical method to estimate the effect of this coding transition on injury hospitalization trends, and 2) interpretation of significant changes in injury trends in the context of the structural and conceptual differences between ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM, the new ICD-10-CM-specific coding guidelines, and proposed ICD-10-CM-based framework for reporting of injuries by intent and mechanism. Segmented regression analysis was used for statistical modeling of interrupted time series monthly data to evaluate the effect of the transition to ICD-10-CM on Kentucky hospitalizations' external-cause-of-injury completeness (percentage of records with principal injury diagnoses supplemented with external-cause-of-injury codes), as well as injury hospitalization trends by intent or mechanism, January 2012-December 2017. RESULTS:The segmented regression analysis showed an immediate significant drop in external-cause-of-injury completeness during the transition month, but returned to its pre-transition levels in November 2015. There was a significant immediate change in the percentage of injury hospitalizations coded for unintentional (3.34%) and undetermined intent (-?3.39%). There were immediate significant changes in the level of injury hospitalization rates due to poisoning, suffocation, struck by/against, other transportation, unspecified mechanism, and other specified not elsewhere classifiable mechanism. Significant change in slope after the transition (without immediate level change) was identified for assault, firearm, cut/pierce, and motor vehicle traffic injury rates. The observed trend changes reflected structural and conceptual features of ICD-10-CM coding (e.g., poisoning and suffocations are now captured via diagnosis codes only), new coding guidelines (e.g., requiring coding of injury intent as "accidental" if it is unknown or unspecified), and CDC proposed external-cause-of-injury code groupings by injury intent and mechanism. Researchers can replicate this methodology assessing trends in injuries or other ICD-10-CM-coded conditions using administrative billing data sets. CONCLUSIONS:The CDC 's Proposed Framework for Presenting Injury Data Using ICD-10-CM External Cause of Injury Codes provided a logical transition from the ICD-9-CM-based matrix on injury hospitalization trends by intent and mechanism. Our findings are intended to raise awareness that changes in the ICD-10-CM coding system must be understood to assure accurate interpretation of injury trends.

Project description:BACKGROUND:The phecode system was built upon the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) for phenome-wide association studies (PheWAS) using the electronic health record (EHR). OBJECTIVE:The goal of this paper was to develop and perform an initial evaluation of maps from the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) and the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes to phecodes. METHODS:We mapped ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM codes to phecodes using a number of methods and resources, such as concept relationships and explicit mappings from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, the Unified Medical Language System, Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics, Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine-Clinical Terms, and the National Library of Medicine. We assessed the coverage of the maps in two databases: Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) using ICD-10-CM and the UK Biobank (UKBB) using ICD-10. We assessed the fidelity of the ICD-10-CM map in comparison to the gold-standard ICD-9-CM phecode map by investigating phenotype reproducibility and conducting a PheWAS. RESULTS:We mapped >75% of ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM codes to phecodes. Of the unique codes observed in the UKBB (ICD-10) and VUMC (ICD-10-CM) cohorts, >90% were mapped to phecodes. We observed 70-75% reproducibility for chronic diseases and <10% for an acute disease for phenotypes sourced from the ICD-10-CM phecode map. Using the ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM maps, we conducted a PheWAS with a Lipoprotein(a) genetic variant, rs10455872, which replicated two known genotype-phenotype associations with similar effect sizes: coronary atherosclerosis (ICD-9-CM: P<.001; odds ratio (OR) 1.60 [95% CI 1.43-1.80] vs ICD-10-CM: P<.001; OR 1.60 [95% CI 1.43-1.80]) and chronic ischemic heart disease (ICD-9-CM: P<.001; OR 1.56 [95% CI 1.35-1.79] vs ICD-10-CM: P<.001; OR 1.47 [95% CI 1.22-1.77]). CONCLUSIONS:This study introduces the beta versions of ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM to phecode maps that enable researchers to leverage accumulated ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM data for PheWAS in the EHR.

Project description:Background:The International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) Injury Severity Score (ICISS) is a risk adjustment model when injuries are recorded using ICD-9-CM coding. The trauma mortality prediction model (TMPM-ICD9) provides better calibration and discrimination compared with ICISS and injury severity score (ISS). Though TMPM-ICD9 is statistically rigorous, it is not precise enough mathematically and has the tendency to overestimate injury severity. The purpose of this study is to develop a new ICD-10-CM injury model which estimates injury severities for every injury in the ICD-10-CM lexicon by a combination of rigorous statistical probit models and mathematical properties and improves the prediction accuracy. Methods:We developed an injury mortality prediction (IMP-ICDX) using data of 794,098 patients admitted to 738 hospitals in the National Trauma Data Bank from 2015 to 2016. Empiric measures of severity for each of the trauma ICD-10-CM codes were estimated using a weighted median death probability (WMDP) measurement and then used as the basis for IMP-ICDX. ISS (version 2005) and the single worst injury (SWI) model were re-estimated. The performance of each of these models was compared by using the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC), the Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL) statistic, and the Akaike information criterion statistic. Results:IMP-ICDX exhibits significantly better discrimination (AUCIMP-ICDX, 0.893, and 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.887 to 0.898; AUCISS, 0.853, and 95% CI, 0.846 to 0.860; and AUCSWI, 0.886, and 95% CI, 0.881 to 0.892) and calibration (HLIMP-ICDX, 68, and 95% CI, 36 to 98; HLISS, 252, and 95% CI, 191 to 310; and HLSWI, 92, and 95% CI, 53 to 128) compared with ISS and SWI. All models were improved after the extension of age, gender, and injury mechanism, but the augmented IMP-ICDX still dominated ISS and SWI by every performance. Conclusions:The IMP-ICDX has a better discrimination and calibration compared to ISS. Therefore, we believe that IMP-ICDX could be a new viable trauma research assessment method.

Dataset Information

A narrative review of the impact of the transition to ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM/PCS.

Objectives

Materials and methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Publications

A narrative review of the impact of the transition to ICD-10 and ICD-10-CM/PCS.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure