{"id":9857,"date":"2013-11-04T22:56:39","date_gmt":"2013-11-05T03:56:39","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.poweryourpractice.com\/?p=9857"},"modified":"2025-06-27T15:08:52","modified_gmt":"2025-06-27T15:08:52","slug":"icd-10-pilot-program","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/carecloud.com\/continuum\/icd-10-pilot-program\/","title":{"rendered":"Lessons to Take From the ICD-10 Pilot Program"},"content":{"rendered":"

As you’re coming down from all of the Halloween hoopla, \u201cscary\u201d may be the last word you want to hear. But the results of the recently completed ICD-10<\/a> test pilot program are just that.<\/p>\n

Speaking before hundreds of attendees at this year\u2019s HIMSS conference, Holt Anderson, Executive Director at the North Carolina Healthcare Information and Communications Alliance, said providers in the program reported a startling 50% decrease in worker productivity<\/a> and a higher rate of errors<\/strong> when submitting claims.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s review the outcomes of the ICD-10 pilot program and the areas projected to cause the most trouble.<\/p>\n

ICD-10 Pilot Program Results<\/strong><\/h2>\n

The test launch, which ran between April and August, consisted of 30 provider organizations including software system vendors, health plans, billing companies, claims clearinghouses and government contractors.<\/p>\n

The final 54-page report from HIMSS and the Workgroup for Electronic Data Interchange revealed that medical coders participating in the ICD-10\u00a0coding pilot produced accurate codes less than two-thirds of the time. In addition, it took coders twice as long to submit a claim using ICD-10 than it did in the ICD-9 coding system.<\/p>\n

Accuracy rates also varied depending on the type of medical condition<\/strong> coded. For instance, an assessment of acute gastritis without bleeding was coded accurately on 100% of claims, but \u201cchest pain, unspecified\u201d was coded accurately only 34% of the time.<\/p>\n

Lisa Gallagher, Vice President of Technology Solutions at HIMSS, says these disparities will be common in such a highly specified system.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere are all kinds of supporting functions that end up influencing how a document is coded,\u201d said Gallagher. With ICD-10, \u201cyou’re moving to a place where there is so much specificity in how things are coded. They may not know they need to provide documentation to a coder to reach a certain granularity.\u201d<\/p>\n

Gallagher said the main takeaway from the pilot should be that the healthcare industry needs to work together to meet ICD-10 issues head-on.<\/p>\n

Lessons Learned<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Because coding errors were so prevalent, the study lists certain mistakes<\/a> that occurred regularly.<\/p>\n

Some of the common mistakes revealed from the pilot study included:<\/p>\n