KLAS Finds Providers Behind the ICD-10 Eight Ball

Less than 10 percent of healthcare providers are over halfway there in terms of being fully prepared for ICD-10, according to the KLAS report, ICD-10: Preparing for October 2013. While providers know a lack of preparation could result in a halt to reimbursements and a revenue cycle disaster when ICD-10 comes, KLAS found that most organizations are still in the strategy/planning phase of their preparation.

This is significant, states the organization, given that providers further down the path of preparation told KLAS ICD-10 readiness is a complex and costly initiative — one that will require significant time and resources. One patient accounting director said, “We know there is a lot of work to be done. In our opinion, meaningful use is a cakewalk compared to ICD-10.”

The research found many providers have not yet established an ICD-10 budget.  Feedback from more progressive organizations indicates ICD-10 won’t be cheap, KLAS added. Some large health systems are planning to spend tens of millions of dollars on their ICD-10 preparation, while some mid-size hospitals are planning to spend several million. According to KLAS, some of the internal steps these providers have taken are developing a steering committee; creating a comprehensive ICD-10 readiness strategy; developing training plans for coders, physicians, nurses and other staff; assessing compliance and technology needs; and formulating a detailed budget.

Nearly two-thirds of providers in the study are engaging or planning to engage with third-party firms to assist with one or more of these preparation steps. The report found that the majority of these providers currently engaging with firms do so for strategy and gap-analysis work; whereas most providers planning to use a third-party firm in the future say they will do so for training staff. Many providers are rushing to engage with firms, as demand for them is increasing, KLAS found. “It is a feeding frenzy for consultants,” one healthcare provider told the organization. “We thought maybe we would get in there before the price for an assessment skyrocketed.”

The report also explored providers’ greatest concerns regarding ICD-10, with internal organizational readiness — namely staff training and physician/nurse readiness — topping the list. It also found that 60 percent of providers were concerned about the ICD-10 readiness of their core clinical/financial vendor. Nearly half of those interviewed said they felt their coding vendor was their most progressive vendor in helping them prepare for ICD-10 readiness.

Core vendors mentioned in the report are 3M, Allscripts, Cerner, Epic, GE Healthcare, Ingenix, McKesson, Meditech, QuadraMed, and Siemens.  Other vendors mentioned are CPSI, Healthland, HMS, and MedAssets. Major third party firms mentioned are 3M, Accenture, Advisory Board, AHIMA, Deloitte, HIM Consulting, J.A. Thomas, maxIT, McKesson, Precyse, PwC, and QuadraMed.

For this research KLAS interviewed 163 providers to understand their ICD-10 readiness strategy, major concerns, progress in preparing, confidence in their core and component vendors’ ICD-10 readiness, and intentions for using third-party firms to assist them.