Being governed by two separate federal directives, apparently "ICD-10" and "Meaningful use of EHR" are today touted as two distinct and possibly dissimilar goals, though they really are not. Both initiatives are an attempt to achieve two primary targets, i.e., 1) improved quality of care, and 2) reduced cost of care. It is just the means and approaches where they differ. Beyond the obvious congruence of objectives, there are similarities in implementation efforts also. Both "Meaningful use of EHR" and ICD-10 implementations impact not only the similar technology portfolio of the organization but also the same business process landscape and stakeholders, significantly. With understanding of such a common impact spectrum, when one is adopting EHRs for the purpose of meaningful usage, it makes absolute sense to add the ICD-10 logic in there at a small incremental cost rather than to leave the effort to a later day and incur additional, huge implementation bill.
Do you think the twain shall meet?
Click here to read our Point of View published in HIMSS.