Identifying Older Adults With Serious Illness: Transitioning From ICD-9 to ICD-10
- PMID: 30876955
- PMCID: PMC11200201
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2019.03.006
Identifying Older Adults With Serious Illness: Transitioning From ICD-9 to ICD-10
Abstract
Context: Identifying the seriously ill population is integral to improving the value of health care. Efforts to identify this population using existing data are anchored to a list of severe medical conditions (SMCs) using diagnostic codes. Published approaches have used International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes, which has since been replaced by ICD-10.
Objectives: We translated SMCs from ICD-9 to ICD-10 using a refined code list. We aimed to test the hypothesis that people identified by ICD-9 or ICD-10 codes would have similar Medicare costs, health care utilization, and mortality.
Methods: Using data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study linked to Medicare claims, we compared samples from periods using ICD-9 (2014) and ICD-10 (2016). We included participants with six-month fee-for-service Medicare data before their interview date who had an SMC identified within that period. We compared the groups' demographic, functional, and medical characteristics and followed up them for six months to compare outcomes.
Results: Among subjects in the 2016 (ICD-10) sample, 19.9% were hospitalized, 24.6% used the emergency department, 7.2% died, and average Medicare spending totaled $9902.04 over six months of follow-up. We observed no significant differences between the 2014 and 2016 samples (P > 0.05); both samples represent 18% of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries.
Conclusion: Identifying the seriously ill population using currently available data requires using ICD-10 to define SMCs. Routine measurement of function, quality of life, and caregiver strain will further enhance the identification process and efficiently target palliative care services and appropriate quality measures.
Keywords: ICD-10; ICD-9; Serious illness; health care value; palliative care.
Published by Elsevier Inc.
Conflict of interest statement
Disclosures
There are no relevant conflicts of interest to disclose.
References
-
- Ahluwalia SC, Chen C, Raaen L, et al. A systematic review in support of the national consensus project clinical practice guidelines for quality palliative care, Fourth Edition. J Pain Symptom Manage 2018;56:831–870. - PubMed
-
- Leff B, Burton L, Mader S, et al. Satisfaction with hospital at home care. J Am Geriatr Soc 2006;54:1355–1363. - PubMed
-
- Leff B, Burton L, Mader SL, et al. Hospital at home: feasibility and outcomes of a program to provide hospital-level care at home for acutely ill older patients. Ann Intern Med 2005;143:798–808. - PubMed
-
- Eng C, Pedulla J, Eleazer GP, McCann R, Fox N. Program of All-inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE): an innovative model of integrated geriatric care and financing. J Am Geriatr Soc 1997;45:223–232. - PubMed
-
- Smith S, Brick A, O’Hara S, Normand C. Evidence on the cost and cost-effectiveness of palliative care: a literature review. Palliat Med 2014;28:130–150. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources