The article “Clinician’s Primer to ICD-10-CM Coding for Cleft Lip/Palate Care” by Allori et al
The article “Clinician’s Primer to ICD-10-CM Coding for Cleft Lip/Palate Care” by Allori et al. seek to address how clinician’s guidelines to assist the understanding and using medical coding which is the “International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM)” for diagnostic coding related to cleft lip or palate among the cleft care community. This set of context explained about the transition or replacement of ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM in diagnostic coding.
There is no specific literature review stated by the authors, however, there are some references were used in the introduction area. According to the authors, Allori et al. (2017) stated that many clinicians, administrators, and researchers may have some confusion and problems occurs during the changes from using ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM. The transition periods of ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM cause some frustration towards clinicians, administrators, and researcher but however it provides a chance for reevaluation and standardization the process and methods of coding. Admittedly, coding systems help to analyze the data and save it in the organization’s system to be used as statistical data of particular condition. According to Allori et al. (2017), this coding system provides a format for recording a clinical entity or state in a way that can be easily stored, accessed, sorted, consolidated, analyzed and transmitted. In my opinion, the qualified healthcare professional such as coders and researchers should implement the use of general equivalence mapping (GEMs) as it provides guidelines to link ICD-9-CM code to the ICD-10-CM. The GEMs provide a help in the translation from ICD-9-CM codes to ICD-10-CM codes (Cartwright, 2013). For example ICD-9-CM code 749.03, ”bilateral CP, complete,” transcodes to ICD-10-CM code Q35.9, ”CP, unspeci?ed” that provide a specific and accurate description (Allori et al, 2017).
A new alternative coding framework have been developed stated by the author in order to help the coding system that known as Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms (SNOMED CT) that helps to describes multi-directional relationships between clinical entities. As Allori et al. (2017) stated that, however, there were critics occurs about this SNOMED CT because it developed some problems such as its extensive vocabulary, with clinical entities missing or hierarchical relationships not fully developed (as cited in Nachimuthu, 2007).
The author clearly stated United States (U.S.) Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) have made a mandated change that have affects all agencies and individuals falling under governance of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) which ICD-10-CM replace ICD-9-CM code sets effective on October 1, 2013, while the deadline for implementation was subsequently extended to take effect on October 1, 2014, and recently extended further to take effect on or after October 1, 2015 (as cited in HHS, 2012) because if the due date to implement ICD-10-CM is on October 1, 2013, the patient records, information and databases will feature 9 months of ICD-9CM data mixed with 3 months of ICD-10-CM data in the same calendar year this will cause confusion towards the coders (Allori et al., 2017). In my opinion to prevent mixed up information patient’s record or database in the replacement of coding system ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM within the due date proposed, the qualified healthcare professional should be sent to training in order to develop a new skills and provide a guidance and improve understanding. Adequate training for coders, as well as guidance regarding time invested per record, is important (Stanfill et al., 2014).