Wiki AMA Proposal - take a second look???


True Blue
Local Chapter Officer
York, Pa
Best answers
Below is a link to an article written by someone at LifeHealthPro, regarding AMA Proposal " Why not skip an ICD Billing Code Generation"....

After reading this article that was sent to me by a good friend, I reached out to the AMA about the article....

Below is the response I received from the AMA....

The article from LifeHealthPro is inaccurate.

The has been no suggestion at the AMA or House of Delegates regarding adopting ICD-11 as a replacement for ICD-9.

The Medical Association of Georgia submitted resolution 236 asking the American Medical Association to evaluate preliminary versions of ICD-11 as a new diagnostic coding system and report back to the House of Delegates in June 2013 as to its potential impact on a physician’s practice.

During open hearings at the AMA House of Delegates, physicians offered supportive testimony on resolution 236. Those who testified indicated that the implementation of ICD-10 coding will create unnecessary and significant financial and workflow disruptions for physicians, especially at a time when physicians are in various stages of trying to implement electronic health records into their practices. Physicians also testified that the next iteration of ICD, ICD-11, is on the horizon so it may be less burdensome of a transition for physicians if they wait and move from ICD-9 to ICD-11 at a much later date.

Resolution 236 calls for our AMA to evaluate the impact ICD-11. Concern that ICD-11 may not be developed enough yet to allow a thorough and comprehensive evaluation resulted in resolution 236 being amended. The House of Delegates agreed that it would be prudent to amend the resolution to instruct the AMA to explore the feasibility of moving from ICD-9 to ICD-11, as an alternative to ICD-10, with a report back to the House of Delegates.

For more accurate reporting of the House of Delegates action, please see this article from Modern Physician:

Just thought I'd share!
Last edited:
Thanks for posting Roxanne!

It seemed odd to me when AMA lobbied for the delay a couple of years ago that now they would want to skip 10 all together, why didn't they want to skip it back then?

It is nice to see them set the record straight.