Combined ICD10 codes: Difference between revisions

(49 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)

Line 1:

To code some diagnoses as part of [[ICD10 collection]], several lines of entries in the [[Patient ~~viewer tab~~ ICD10]] need to be grouped together.

To code some diagnoses as part of [[ICD10 collection]], several lines of entries in the [[Patient Viewer Tab ICD10]] need to be grouped together.

To group diagnoses together, use the same [[Dx Priority]] for all of them.

Combined coding does not apply to [[CCI Collection]] (there is no priority), and there is nothing in the data that links a CCI code to the Dx it is related to.

~~{{ListICD10Category | categoryName = Iatrogenic}}~~

== Coding instructions ==

Line 11:

Line 10:

*For some situations the multiple codes need to be '''''linked together''''' (we use the term "combined").

*For other situations it's just a matter of ensuring that the multiple codes are all in the diagnosis list -- i.e. they don't need to be combined.

*~~For~~ some ~~entities there is no single ICD10 code, and the ''~~only~~'' way to code the entity is to combine two codes.~~

* There are some Dxs that can only be expressed as combinations, see [[#Some specific cases]]

**An example is that to identify Retroperitoneal hemorrhage one must link two codes '''[[Hemorrhage, NOS]]''' and '''[[Retroperitoneal area, diagnostic imaging, abnormal]]'''. So, ~~alongside each of those is a message about this.~~

**Another example is coding Hospital-acquired pneumonia. To get this you combine '''[[~~Iatrogenic, complication of medical or surgical care NOS]]''' with the appropriate type of pneumonia code, e.g. '''[[Pneumonia, bacterial]]''' or '''[[Pneumonia, fungal/yeast~~]]~~'''~~

=== Clinical Situation Plus its Cause ===

*Many ICD10 codes are for manifestations of disease, not a specific disorder ''per se''.

*In their Wiki articles it will say something like "also code cause if known" e.g: '''[[Hematemesis ~~(upper GI bleed/hemorrhage), NOS~~]]'''

*In their Wiki articles it will say something like "also code cause if known" e.g: '''[[Hematemesis]]'''

*If the cause is an infection, the Wiki article will instruct to "also code infection source", e.g: '''[[Shock, septic]]'''

*In general, when you have a manifestation and a cause, the two codes should be combined.

** For example, in Septic Shock that has led to liver failure, the two should be coded with the same priority.

=== Situations in which linking is completely reasonable: ===

*link bugs with an infection,

*link trauma with its mechanism,

*link codes to “create” an entity for which no separate ICD10 code exists, such as retroperitoneal hemorrhage,

*to connect cause with effect(s), e.g. a trauma combined with all the separate fractured bones.

=== Q&A: Just How Far Should You Go in Linking Cause and Effect Diagnoses? ===

*If it is abundantly clear that A caused B that caused C and all of A, B, and C are all Admit or all Acquired, then combine them together. '''If it is possible but not COMPLETELY clear that the items are causally linked, then do NOT combine them'''

*Example#1: Stabbed --> lots of internal organ injuries from the stabbing --> big blood loss ---> hemorrhagic shock --> cardiac arrest.

*Example #2: Chemotherapy --> N/V as an adverse effect --> dehydration --> orthostatic syncope. But Chemo also caused drug-induced thrombocyotopenia as an adverse effect. And Chemo also caused Skin rash as an adverse effect. And all were present on admission (or all occurred after admission and so are Acquired diagnoses). In this case we have the Chemo causing problems in 3 separate pathways. Here again, we want you to combine all 6 codes together with the same priority number.

Rash

/\

|

Adverse effect of chemo ---> N/V --> dehydration --> syncope

|

\/

Drug-induced thrombocytopenia

*What about when there's a diagnosis (A) which is a known risk factor for another diagnosis (B). But in fact B is influenced by other things, not only A. In this case, do NOT combine A and B.

**Example: Diabetes is a risk factor for MI. But so are hypertension, hyperlipidemia and genetic factors. So here do NOT combine the MI with the diabetes (or the hypertension or hyperlipidemia) because it's not a direct arrow from diabetes to MI. But of course, do code all of these diagnoses that are present (in the example that means code the diabetes and the MI, and hypertension if present, etc).

Thanks for clarifying the diabetes issue. [[User:DPageNewton|DPageNewton]] 12:21, 2019 October 10 (CDT)

=== ~~Combined Codes when coding the [[~~Primary Admit Diagnosis]] ===

=== Primary Admit Diagnosis in Combined Codes ===

~~Sometimes an entity best represented as a combined code will be the~~ [[Primary Admit Diagnosis]]~~. The way we use these means we don't want a patient to have two. Normal combined coding would lead to two diagnoses with the highest priority so we have to make a choice.~~

See [[Primary Admit Diagnosis]]

~~The solution is to do '''BOTH''' of the following:~~

=== Dxs that can only be expressed as combinations ===

*For the #1, main reason for admission diagnosis, choose as #1 the diagnosis associated with ~~the highest mortality, i.e. the one that’s “worst”'''. For example, for Liver failure due to Hep B, you'd usually choose the Liver failure as #1.~~

Some entities can only be coded with a combination of two codes.

*ALSO separately code them together, i.e. combined. ~~Yes, there's then some duplication in the diagnosis code list (in the example you'd code Liver failure as the #1 diagnosis, and also code the Liver failure combined with Hep B), but that's OK.~~

~~This solution also works for the rare entities which can only be coded with a combination of two codes. The example above of retroperitoneal hemorrhage is a good one if it~~'~~s the #1 reason for admission. Here you~~'~~d code the~~ '''~~[[Hemorrhage, NOS]]~~'~~'' as #1, but ALSO~~ code '''[[Hemorrhage, NOS]]''' ~~combined with~~ '''[[Retroperitoneal area, diagnostic imaging, abnormal]]'''

'''Examples''':

* retroperitoneal hemorrhage; code combined

** '''[[Hemorrhage, NOS]]'''

** '''[[Retroperitoneal area, diagnostic imaging, abnormal]]'''

* [[Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) in ICD10]]

== Some specific cases ==

~~=== Trauma/injury with mechanism ===~~

{{ICD10 Guideline Signs Symptoms Test Results not needed when cause known}}

=== Other co-codes ===

*In addition to the combined coding situations listed above, you can combine codes when it makes sense to you to do so. The general guideline should be that codes be combined (instead of just both listed in the diagnosis list) when they are '''strongly''' related to each other.

*Use your judgement. Either listing them separately, or combined ensures that they're all there.

== CCMDB Data Integrity Checks ==

Some codes always need to be combined with one or more others.

Most infection codes require combined-coding of a pathogen (some have it implied, like [[Mumps]]), and some disorders can have a pathogen if their cause is infectious. See [[Bug required]] for details.

== Transition notes ==

Yes, this different from how we used to use dx priorities where they had to be unique.

== Data ==

The records are combined by same [[L_ICD10 table|L_ICD10]].[[Dx Priority]].

[[Category: ICD10]]

== Related articles ==

[[Category: ICD10/CCI Conversion]]

[[Category:ICD10]]

[[Category:ICD10/CCI Conversion]]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-To code some diagnoses as part of [[ICD10 collection]], several lines of entries in the [[Patient viewer tab ICD10]] need to be grouped together.
+To code some diagnoses as part of [[ICD10 collection]], several lines of entries in the [[Patient Viewer Tab ICD10]] need to be grouped together.
 To group diagnoses together, use the same [[Dx Priority]] for all of them.
+Combined coding does not apply to [[CCI Collection]] (there is no priority), and there is nothing in the data that links a CCI code to the Dx it is related to.
-{{ListICD10Category | categoryName = Iatrogenic}}
 == Coding instructions ==
@@ Line 11: / Line 10: @@
 *For some situations the multiple codes need to be '''''linked together''''' (we use the term "combined").
 *For other situations it's just a matter of ensuring that the multiple codes are all in the diagnosis list -- i.e. they don't need to be combined.
-*For some entities there is no single ICD10 code, and the ''only'' way to code the entity is to combine two codes.
+* There are some Dxs that can only be expressed as combinations, see [[#Some specific cases]]
-**An example is that to identify Retroperitoneal hemorrhage one must link two codes '''[[Hemorrhage, NOS]]''' and '''[[Retroperitoneal area, diagnostic imaging, abnormal]]'''.  So, alongside each of those is a message about this.
-**Another example is coding Hospital-acquired pneumonia.  To get this you combine '''[[Iatrogenic, complication of medical or surgical care NOS]]''' with the appropriate type of pneumonia code, e.g. '''[[Pneumonia, bacterial]]'''  or '''[[Pneumonia, fungal/yeast]]'''
 === Clinical Situation Plus its Cause ===
 *Many ICD10 codes are for manifestations of disease, not a specific disorder ''per se''.
-*In their Wiki articles it will say something like "also code cause if known" e.g: '''[[Hematemesis (upper GI bleed/hemorrhage), NOS]]'''
+*In their Wiki articles it will say something like "also code cause if known" e.g: '''[[Hematemesis]]'''
 *If the cause is an infection, the Wiki article will instruct to "also code infection source", e.g:  '''[[Shock, septic]]'''
 *In general, when you have a manifestation and a cause, the two codes should be combined.
+** For example, in Septic Shock that has led to liver failure, the two should be coded with the same priority.
+=== Situations in which linking is completely reasonable: ===
+*link bugs with an infection,
+*link trauma with its mechanism,
+*link codes to “create” an entity for which no separate ICD10 code exists, such as retroperitoneal hemorrhage,
+*to connect cause with effect(s), e.g. a trauma combined with all the separate fractured bones.
+=== Q&A: Just How Far Should You Go in Linking Cause and Effect Diagnoses? ===
+*If it is abundantly clear that A caused B that caused C and all of A, B, and C are all Admit or all Acquired, then combine them together.  '''If it is possible but not COMPLETELY clear that the items are causally linked, then do NOT combine them'''
+*Example#1:  Stabbed --> lots of internal organ injuries from the stabbing --> big blood loss ---> hemorrhagic shock --> cardiac arrest.
+*Example #2:  Chemotherapy --> N/V as an adverse effect --> dehydration --> orthostatic syncope.  But Chemo also caused drug-induced thrombocyotopenia as an adverse effect.  And Chemo also caused Skin rash as an adverse effect.  And all were present on admission (or all occurred after admission and so are Acquired diagnoses).  In this case we have the Chemo causing problems in 3 separate pathways. Here again, we want you to combine all 6 codes together with the same priority number.
+    Rash
+     /\
+     |
+     |
+    Adverse effect of chemo ---> N/V --> dehydration --> syncope
+     |
+     |
+     \/
+    Drug-induced thrombocytopenia
+*What about when there's a diagnosis (A) which is a known risk factor for another diagnosis (B).  But in fact B is influenced by other things, not only A.  In this case, do NOT combine A and B.
+**Example:  Diabetes is a risk factor for MI.  But so are hypertension, hyperlipidemia and genetic factors.  So here do NOT combine the MI with the diabetes (or the hypertension or hyperlipidemia) because it's not a direct arrow from diabetes to MI.  But of course, do code all of these diagnoses that are present (in the example that means code the diabetes and the MI, and hypertension if present, etc).
+Thanks for clarifying the diabetes issue. [[User:DPageNewton|DPageNewton]] 12:21, 2019 October 10 (CDT)
-=== Combined Codes when coding the [[Primary Admit Diagnosis]] ===
+=== Primary Admit Diagnosis in Combined Codes  ===
-Sometimes an entity best represented as a combined code will be the [[Primary Admit Diagnosis]]. The way we use these means we don't want a patient to have two. Normal combined coding would lead to two diagnoses with the highest priority so we have to make a choice.
+See [[Primary Admit Diagnosis]]
-The solution is to do '''BOTH''' of the following:
+=== Dxs that can only be expressed as combinations ===
-*For the #1, main reason for admission diagnosis, choose as #1 the diagnosis associated with the highest mortality, i.e. the one that’s “worst”'''.  For example, for Liver failure due to Hep B, you'd usually choose the Liver failure as #1.
+Some entities can only be coded with a combination of two codes.
-*ALSO separately code them together, i.e. combined.  Yes, there's then some duplication in the diagnosis code list (in the example you'd code Liver failure as the #1 diagnosis, and also code the Liver failure combined with Hep B), but that's OK.
-This solution also works for the rare entities which can only be coded with a combination of two codes.  The example above of retroperitoneal hemorrhage is a good one if it's the #1 reason for admission.  Here you'd code the '''[[Hemorrhage, NOS]]''' as #1, but ALSO code '''[[Hemorrhage, NOS]]''' combined with '''[[Retroperitoneal area, diagnostic imaging, abnormal]]'''
+'''Examples''':
+* retroperitoneal hemorrhage; code combined
+** '''[[Hemorrhage, NOS]]'''
+** '''[[Retroperitoneal area, diagnostic imaging, abnormal]]'''
+* [[Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) in ICD10]]
 == Some specific cases ==
-{{Combined dx metastasis primary}}
+{{ICD10 Guideline Combined dx metastasis primary}}
-{{Combined dx AB resistance}}
+{{ICD10 Guideline Trauma w mechanism}}
+{{ICD10 Guideline Infection}}
-=== Trauma/injury with mechanism ===
+{{ICD10 Guideline Combined dx AB resistance}}
-{{Trauma w mechanism}}
+{{ICD10 Guideline Signs Symptoms Test Results not needed when cause known}}
 === Other co-codes ===
 *In addition to the combined coding situations listed above, you can combine codes when it makes sense to you to do so.  The general guideline should be that codes be combined (instead of just both listed in the diagnosis list) when they are '''strongly''' related to each other.
 *Use your judgement.  Either listing them separately, or combined ensures that they're all there.
+== CCMDB Data Integrity Checks ==
+Some codes always need to be combined with one or more others.
+Most infection codes require combined-coding of a pathogen (some have it implied, like [[Mumps]]), and some disorders can have a pathogen if their cause is infectious. See [[Bug required]] for details.
 == Transition notes ==
 Yes, this different from how we used to use dx priorities where they had to be unique.
 == Data ==
 The records are combined by same [[L_ICD10 table|L_ICD10]].[[Dx Priority]].
-[[Category: ICD10]]
+== Related articles ==
-[[Category: ICD10/CCI Conversion]]
+{{Related Articles}}
+[[Category:ICD10]]
+[[Category:ICD10/CCI Conversion]]