My middle daughter is a graduate student in opera at Eastman
School of Music. After October 1, if I go to hear her sing in an opera and get
injured while there, a specific code must be used if my healthcare is to get
paid. That code is Y92.253: “Opera house as the place of occurrence of the
external cause.”
Perhaps I will be at Ellen Trout Zoo and get “Bitten by
turtle, initial encounter” (W5921XA). And if, for some reason, I am stupid
enough to get injured again by said turtle, there is a code for that, too: “Struck by turtle, subsequent encounter”
(W5922XD). But the current favorite new code among pundits has to be V9027XA: “Drowning and submersion
due to falling or jumping from burning water-skis, initial
encounter.” Really? Who comes up with this? Is this a sick joke?
Our
current system of coding for clinical encounters in healthcare is ICD-9, which
has been in use since 1979. ICD-9 contains around 13,000 diagnosis and 3,000
procedure codes, arguably more than we need already. But get ready, because
ICD-10 jumps to 68,000 diagnosis and 72,000 procedure codes, including the
ridiculous ones noted above.
The
change to ICD-10 illustrates the problem of government involvement in
healthcare. First, complexity increases exponentially while usefulness – what I
call the common sense factor – plummets. Then, the government tightens the rule
belt, so that if you do not code correctly (how did I know you were bitten by a
turtle before!), you do not get paid. Not only that – and this is what really
galls me – if you don’t do it correctly, as narrowly and obscurely defined as
only the federal government can do it, it is labeled fraud and abuse.
Someone
asked me, as I explained this to them, “How will the government know if you
didn’t do it correctly?”
Simple.
They contract out to firms that employ high school-educated workers to go out
and look for “fraud and abuse”. These firms get paid for what they find –
whether or not what they find is really accurate – and then the government
takes back those “fraud and abuse” payments from the provider (the doctor or
the hospital, for example). Then, the provider has to fight multiple levels of
appeal in order to get their money back, if they can afford the appeal process.
This
is how our federal government is “saving money” with healthcare reform: make
the hoops impossible to jump through; only pay you if you manage to make it
through the hoop; then take back what they pay you because someone else with an
unfair incentive claims you didn’t really make it through the hoop after all.
Our
healthcare system truly needs to be reformed, but so far, very little is
happening that gives me hope that we are headed the right direction. I foresee
an explosion of job opportunities starting October 1, and anyone with expertise
with how to code under ICD-10 will be golden. Orthopedic surgery, for example,
will see one code under ICD-9 – 821.01 Fracture of femur, shaft, closed –
expand into at least twenty four possible codes under ICD-10, depending on
laterality, displaced or non-displaced, location, fracture type (greenstick,
comminuted, transverse), type of healing (routine, delayed, non-healing),
malunion, nonunion, open or closed, and encounter type (initial or subsequent).
Those who can play the game successfully will survive.
At a time when payment for healthcare services needs
simplification, we are taking a major step in the wrong direction. Now, is that
step left, or right? There’s probably a code for that.
