Dual coding made a brief appearance Monday at American Health Information Management Association's (AHIMA) 2012 ICD-10 Summit.
Rose Dunn, chief operating officer at First Class Solutions, spoke about catching up with ICD-10 implementation. DecisonHealth editor Laura Evans reported that Dunn told the crowd that " the National Council for Prescription Drug Programs (NCPDP) recommends that retail pharmacies require ICD-10 codes on their electronic prescriptions starting March 1, 2013."
I'm not sure about that. The only reference to the March 1 date is in a whitepaper that recommends that pharmacies get the code sets from healthcare providers. I'm waiting to get confirmation from the NCPDP. But it sounds like it's a preparation step not a shadow implementation deadline. Even so, it sounds like a good idea to add pharmacies to the list of testing partners.
But Evans also reports that Dunn reminded everyonethat there will non-HIPAA-covered entities that will not be required to use the ICD-10 code sets. Workers' compensation agencies for example.
[See also: Why non-covered entities will want to vigorously implement ICD-10 coding]
Dunn raises the possibility that both sets of codes may be needed on the same claims.
Isn't this the problem that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said it was avoiding by instituting one deadline for all-covered entities?
Carl Natale blogs regularly at ICD10Watch.com.