Of a sample of 23 PSI ICD-9 codes, just three had an equivalent ICD-10 code. For 15 of the codes, the mapping was ‘convoluted,’ often meaning more than one ICD-9 code translated into the same ICD-10 code. Five of the 23 PSI codes were either depreciated or had no ICD-10 equivalent.
To determine the effect these mapping issues would have on adverse event reporting, researchers studied a sample of 1,446,581 Medicaid visits in Illinois. Researchers used the visits’ ICD-9 codes to determine the number of visits including a PSI indicator, and compared these results to the PSIs represented after the visits were coded using ICD-10. Results showed both under- and overreporting of adverse events based on the transition to ICD-10.
This could lead to misleading quality data from providers, write the authors. “PSI results published on public reporting sites, such as Hospital Compare, could be non-representative of a safe hospital environment, which is a burden to patients,” they write. “Finally, ethical organizations addressing ‘data-, process-, and system-focused’ improvements could be penalized using the new ICD-10-CM AHRQ PSIs because of apparent increases in PSIs bearing the same PSI identifier and label, yet calculated differently.”
More articles on ICD-10:
CMS announces 3 weeks of ICD-10 tests
4 hospitals receive revenue cycle awards
6 CIOs with tenures of 20 years or more
At the Becker's 11th Annual IT + Revenue Cycle Conference: The Future of AI & Digital Health, taking place September 14–17 in Chicago, healthcare executives and digital leaders from across the country will come together to explore how AI, interoperability, cybersecurity, and revenue cycle innovation are transforming care delivery, strengthening financial performance, and driving the next era of digital health. Apply for complimentary registration now.