Note: This is not an April Fools’ joke.

On March 31, the US Senate voted 64-35 to approve a House-drafted bill that includes a provision to push the ICD-10 deadline back a year—all without a single mention of ICD-10during a nearly three-hour Senate floor debate. The main purpose of the bill—HR 4302—was to enact a one-year “fix” of the Sustainable Growth Rate (SGR) formula, thus preventing a 24% cut in Medicare’s physician reimbursement rate. This legislation represents the 17th temporary Medicare fix since the passage of the Balanced Budget Act was in 1997. According to an APTA press release, “the final bill replaces the cut with a .5% provider payment update through the end of the year and no update from January 1 to April 1 in 2015.” In addition to the SGR patch and the ICD-10 delay, the bill includes one-year extensions for the therapy cap exceptions process and the Geographic Pricing Cost Index (GPCI). The bill now awaits President Obama’s signature, which, according to social media buzz, should occur today.

As this article explains, no one is quite sure how an ICD-10 delay made its way into the SGR fix bill. Although the legislation was the product of a bipartisan effort, there were senators from both sides who vocally opposed its passage, citing the importance of paying for the quality—not the quantity—of healthcare services. However, in the midst of all this passionate debate, not a single Senator mentioned ICD-10—much to the chagrin of the associations that so vehemently opposed the implementation delay, including the College of Healthcare Information Management Executives (CHIME), the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA), the Medical Group Management Association (MGMA), the American Medical Association (AMA), the Health Information and Management Systems Society (HIMSS), and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

So, why the silence on ICD-10? One theory is that lawmakers were simply unaware of the ICD-10 provision and its potential implications. As this Government Health IT article suggests, “Perhaps if the Senate had voted down the bill, regrouped, come back with another stab at permanent SGR repeal, someone would have noticed Section 212 saying that HHS cannot mandate ICD-10 as the standard code set before Oct. 1, 2015.” But now that the delay is happening, the healthcare industry must face the financial consequences. CMS estimates that the total cost of delaying implementation will fall somewhere between $1 billion and $6.6 billion, and Resultant founder and healthcare consultant Joe Lavelle projects that waiting another year could cost each of his clients anywhere from $500,000 to $3 million, according to the Government Health IT article.

With no indication that President Obama will exercise his veto rights, this bill should become law today. We’ll update this post as the story unfolds.

Medicare Open Forum - Regular BannerMedicare Open Forum - Small Banner
  • This Week in PT News, June 12 Image

    articleJun 12, 2015 | 2 min. read

    This Week in PT News, June 12

    New Study Reveals Why Some Indigenous Cultures Don’t Experience Back Pain According to NPR, California acupuncturist Esther Gokhale recently conducted an investigation into the factors that might explain why some indigenous cultures don’t experience low back pain. Like 75% of Americans, Gokhale has experienced back pain, and she wasn’t convinced Western medicine could cure her ailment. So, she spent ten years visiting and studying populations that report having little to no back pain. She noticed that while …

  • Preparing for ICD-10 Image

    webinarApr 29, 2014

    Preparing for ICD-10

    At the end of March, Congress passed legislation that delays the mandatory transition to ICD-10 until October 1, 2015. With all that extra time, some of you might be eager to push the new code set to the back of your mind. Au contraire! Even though we now have a year and six months until the US goes live with ICD-10, there’s still a lot to be done—and we’re here to help. In this month’s webinar, we’ll …

  • ICD-10: Fact or Fiction Image

    articleApr 3, 2014 | 5 min. read

    ICD-10: Fact or Fiction

    As with any major change, the rumor mill churns at a mighty pace. With all the hearsay, telephone games, and disbursement of misinformation, it’s easy for the myths to swallow the truth. No worries, though; we’re here to sort the fact from the fiction. Fiction: Coders will spend an overwhelming amount of time dealing with external cause codes. Fact: From being struck by an orca to getting injured while crocheting, Chapter 20 of the ICD-10-CM Manual , …

  • Compliance Expert Tom Ambury Talks ICD-10 Image

    articleApr 10, 2014 | 3 min. read

    Compliance Expert Tom Ambury Talks ICD-10

    Everyone has been gearing up in preparation of the October 1, 2014, ICD-10 implementation deadline. (Even CMS changed their claim form requirements: beginning on April 1, 2014, if you submit paper claims, you must use CMS1500 version 2/12 instead of version 8/05.) No one thought there would be another delay—that is, until Thursday, March 27, when the House of Representatives passed HR 4302, a bill that contained a provision to delay the implementation and extend the therapy …

  • ICD-10: Here is What You Need to Know Now  Image

    articleMar 31, 2014 | 4 min. read

    ICD-10: Here is What You Need to Know Now

    We’ve officially hit the six-month mark  one-year-six-month mark for the mandatory ICD-10 transition on October 1, 2015, and that means it's time to prepare, even with the extension. So, we’re devoting this month’s blog posts and webinar to ICD-10; we want to help you and your practice prepare. Before we get down to brass tacks—and there are a lot of them when it comes to this new code set—let’s get you up to speed. Here is what you …

  • articleOct 21, 2013 | 5 min. read

    Why You Should Test ICD-10 Before October 1

    “ICD-10 is coming. ICD-10 is coming.” You might be tempted to turn away, go back to work, and ignore this Paul Revere-style warning. But that would be unwise. Sure, October 1, 2015, might seem far, far away, but we all know that time flies, and this ICD-10 implementation deadline will be here before we know it. So let’s put a big X on the calendar, and begin our countdown to preparedness. Today, we’re talking about the importance …

  • Top Regulatory Changes of 2014 Image

    articleDec 22, 2014 | 3 min. read

    Top Regulatory Changes of 2014

    Ch-ch-ch-changes : We’ve seen a plethora of regulatory changes this year in the PT space—from the ICD-10 delay to the therapy cap increase. Although some of these legislative twists and turns have caused headaches for therapists, others have been hugely positive. For instance, some form of direct access is now available in all 50 states as well as Washington, DC, and the US Virgin Islands. Read on to learn this year’s top regulatory changes. Regulatory Heavy-Hitters of …

  • ICD-10 FAQ Part 4 Image

    articleNov 3, 2015 | 5 min. read

    ICD-10 FAQ Part 4

    Like the many Land Before Time sequels, the versions of our ICD-10 FAQ keep on-a-comin’. But—unlike those beloved dinosaur tales—I don’t anticipate 12 more versions (plus a TV series) will be necessary to cover what’s to come with ICD-10. Still, the questions continue to roll in—albeit a bit slower than they did a couple of months ago. However, most of the inquiries we’ve received in recent weeks have been super specific. That’s why, our most recent webinar—the …

  • A Farewell Ode to ICD-9 Image

    articleSep 30, 2015 | 2 min. read

    A Farewell Ode to ICD-9

    As the hours count down It’s hard to believe That we’ve finally made it To ICD-10 Eve Our journey to get here Hasn’t been without strife As the US has clung To ICD-9 for dear life Letting go can be hard And change can be tough But in the modern medical world ICD-9 just isn’t enough Unlike a fine wine That gets better with time ICD-9 has aged poorly— It’s way past its prime Sure, we’ll always …

Achieve greatness in practice with the ultimate EMR for PTs, OTs, and SLPs.