Incidental to the AMA's opposition to the SGR fix bill is that they fail to actively support the one-year delay of ICD-10 that is included in that bill. Interesting ploy--oppose a bill that you could live with. If their opposition fails to change minds and the bill is passed, they are not blamed by others for the ICD-10 delay and they are not blamed by us physicians for not trying to fix SGR. They get a delay in ICD-10 and they begin hard work to fix SGR next time. On the other hand, there is obviously no luxury of a "next time" for an ICD-10 delay once the implementation starts.
And, by the way, the dream of skipping ICD-10 and moving to ICD-11 sooner momentarily flickered in my head last night. The cost analysis of the two possible pathways to ICD-11 would still be interesting. However, I recognize that the sunken costs into the current pathway to ICD-11 (through an ICD-10 implementation) have grown exponentially since I wrote that blog.
ICD-11 could be implemented within 7 years if we are determined to do so. But once we implement ICD-10 I fear the industry will not be able to stomach an ICD-11 implementation within a decade. And if the ICD-10 implementation is a debacle, then I believe thinking about ICD-11 will cause such nausea that it will be delayed 15-20 years. For ICD-11's sake, I hope the one-year delay holds up in order to mitigate the chances of an ICD-10 debacle this year.