12 Point Skinny on ICD-11

Post #305 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-3Rm

As no new posts will be added to the site from April, I leave you with my 12 Point Skinny on ICD-11 that I first published in February.

The version below has been updated to reflect changes since February.

A brief summary of how things stand in the Beta drafting platform at March 31, 2014.

If reposting, please repost unedited, with the publication date and source URL:

http://wp.me/pKrrB-3Rm

Dx Revision Watch’s 12 Point Skinny on ICD-11:

1. The ICD-10 terms, PVFS, BME, CFS, are not currently displaying in the public version of the Beta drafting platform under any chapters, either as ICD Title terms, or as Inclusion terms to ICD Title terms, or under Synonyms to ICD Title terms.

2. On Feb 12, 2014, @WHO Twitter admin stated: “Fibromyalgia, ME/CFS are not included as Mental & Behavioural Disorders in ICD-10, there is no proposal to do so for ICD-11″. This position was also confirmed by Mr Gregory Härtl, Head of Public Relations/Social Media, WHO.

3. But WHO/ICD Revision has yet to clarify its intentions for classification of PVFS, BME, CFS within ICD-11, in terms of chapter locations, parent classes (including multiple parentage), hierarchies, definitions etc.

4. Since June 2013, multiple requests have been made to WHO/ICD Revision to explain the reason for the current absence of these terms from the draft and to issue a statement of clarification. On March 18, 2014, a joint letter was sent to key WHO/ICD Revision personnel [1].

5. Two separate working groups are charged with advising on the revision of the ICD-10 Somatoform disorders section.

6. In 2012, two sets of emerging proposals were published – one for Bodily distress disorder (BDD) and one for Bodily stress syndrome (BSS).

7. In 2012, emerging proposals by the S3DWG (Gureje, Creed’s sub working group) for Bodily distress disorder (BDD) were for an SSD-like psychobehavioural responses construct/criteria [2].

8. In 2012, emerging proposals by the PCCG (Goldberg’s Primary Care Consultation Group) for Bodily stress syndrome (BSS) drew heavily on a Fink et al BDS-like symptom patterns from body systems construct/criteria, but with some SSD-like psychobehavioural responses tacked on (a mash-up between two divergent constructs) [3].

9. The current Definition for Bodily distress disorder (BDD), as inserted in the Beta drafting platform, [4] is based on disorder description wording in the 2012 Gureje, Creed BDD paper, which had described an SSD-like construct [2].

10. BDD had a child category, Severe bodily distress disorder. This is now removed from the draft. ICD-10′s Somatization disorder has been restored to the draft linearizations as a child category to parent, Bodily distress disorder. Additionally, ICD-10′s F48.0 Neurasthenia has been restored to the draft linearizations, under parent Mental and behavioural disorders.

Seven ICD-10 Somatoform disorders categories (F45.0 – F45.9) plus F48.0 Neurasthenia had previously been proposed to be subsumed by a single new disorder construct, BDD [2]. How these two (now restored) legacy categories from ICD-10 are currently envisaged to relate to any new single disorder framework to replace the Somatoform disorders remains to be clarified.

11. Without full disorder descriptions, criteria, inclusions, exclusions, differential diagnoses etc, there is insufficient information in the public version of the Beta draft to determine the characteristics and criteria for whatever construct is being progressed to field tests, or to determine whether the two advisory groups have reached consensus.

12. ICD-11 Beta is a work in progress, updated daily, not finalized, subject to field test evaluation, not approved by ICD Revision or WHO.

+++
References for 12 Point Skinny on ICD-11:

1. Joint letter signed by Annette Brooke MP, Chair, All Party Parliamentary Group on M.E., Countess of Mar, Chair, House of Lords-led group Forward ME, Dr Charles Shepherd, Medical Adviser of the ME Association, Sonya Chawdhury, Chief Executive, Action for M.E.
http://www.actionforme.org.uk/Resources/Action%20for%20ME/Documents/get-informed/who-icd-11-letter-17-3-14-sc.pdf

2. Creed F, Gureje O. Emerging themes in the revision of the classification of somatoform disorders. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2012 Dec;24(6):556-67. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23244611 [Full text behind paywall]

3. Lam TP, Goldberg DP, Dowell AC, Fortes S, Mbatia JK, Minhas FA, Klinkman MS: Proposed new diagnoses of anxious depression and bodily stress syndrome in ICD-11-PHC: an international focus group study. Fam Pract Feb 2013 [Epub ahead of print July 2012]. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22843638. Full free text: http://fampra.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/1/76.long

4. ICD-11 Beta drafting platform public version: Bodily distress disorder: http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/http%3a%2f%2fid.who.int%2ficd%2fentity%2f767044268

Caveats: The ICD-11 Beta drafting platform is not a static document: it is a work in progress, subject to daily edits and revisions, to field test evaluation and to approval by Topic Advisory Group Managing Editors, the ICD Revision Steering Group and WHO classification experts.

 

Clarification: Coalition for Diagnostic Rights

A website called Coalition for Diagnostic Rights has recently been launched.
The site includes references to Suzy Chapman and to Dx Revision Watch.
Suzy Chapman/Dx Revision Watch is not associated with or affiliated to the Coalition for Diagnostic Rights website or with any organization associated with that site, and has no responsibility for content published on that site, or published in the name of that site on other platforms.
Suzy Chapman
Dx Revision Watch

Moving on

Post #304 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-3QY

I am still seeing considerable confusion, misunderstanding and misreporting around what can and what cannot be determined from the public version of the ICD-11 Beta drafting platform on emerging proposals for revision of ICD-10′s Somatoform disorders.

If writing about complex classificatory revision processes, I suggest you first familiarize yourselves with how the several ICD-11 Beta drafting platform linearizations function and interrelate; that you inform yourselves about the proposals of both ICD-11 working groups charged with making recommendations for potential revision of the ICD-10 Somatoform disorders, including obtaining and scrutinizing key journal papers, reports and presentations on emerging proposals published by members of both working groups; and that for comparison, you have an understanding of the existing F45 Somatoform disorders framework and the disorder descriptions and criteria for the categories located under this section of ICD-10, and that you are also familiar with the construct and criteria for DSM-5′s Somatic symptom disorder, in order that you can provide evidence based, accurate and up to date information and analysis, within the limitations of what information is public domain.

Reiteration of misinformation and inaccurate reporting on blogs, websites and social media platforms helps no-one. It devalues patient and carer concerns; it undermines the work of advocates committed to providing accurate, referenced and timely information; it panics patients and provokes knee jerk “activism” and “slacktivism.”

It has become clear to me, down the years, that the majority of ME patients are not interested in evidence based reporting.

I am wasting my time.

For those who have listened, thank you. The site will remain online as a resource.

Suzy Chapman for Dx Revision Watch

“He that reads and grows no wiser seldom suspects his own deficiency, but complains of hard words and obscure sentences, and asks why books are written which cannot be understood.”  Samuel Johnson

Global creep of DSM-5′s Somatic symptom disorder

Post #303 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-3Qq

Update at April 14, 2014:

Written response (April 10, 2014) from Independent Hospital Pricing Authority (IHPA) to request for clarification regarding the term ‘Somatic symptom disorder’ and Australia’s clinical modification of ICD-10, ICD-10-AM:

PDF: IHPA response re SSD and ICD-10-AM


 

As previously posted:

In the previous posting Update on proposal to add DSM-5′s Somatic symptom disorder to ICD-10-CM I reported that NCHS is preparing to rubber stamp proposals to insert Somatic symptom disorder into the U.S.’s forthcoming clinical modification of ICD-10.

Comments/objections to Diagnosis Agenda proposals submitted at the March meeting need to be sent by email to NCHS at nchsicd9CM@cdc.gov by June 20th.

1] According to this Australian legislative document:

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2014L00304

Australian Government, Statement of Principles concerning somatic symptom disorder No. 24 of 2014

for the purposes of the Veterans’ Entitlements Act 1986 and Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004

“Somatic symptom disorder attracts ICD-10-AM code F45.1.”

For the purposes of the Statement of Principles:

“ICD-10-AM code” means a number assigned to a particular kind of injury or disease in The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision, Australian Modification (ICD-10-AM), Eighth Edition, effective date of 1 July 2013, copyrighted by the Independent Hospital Pricing Authority, and having ISBN 978-1-74128-213-9;”

The Australian ICD-10-CM, Eighth Edition, July 2013 is not in the public domain. As I do not have access to a copy, I have contacted the relevant body for clarifications.

I have asked whether Somatic symptom disorder has been added to the Eighth Edition of ICD-10-AM as an Inclusion term to F45.1 Undifferentiated somatoform disorder in the Tabular List and Alphabetical Index.

Or, whether this legislative document relies on the ICD cross-walk codes as published in the DSM-5 in May 2013 for the cross-walk between DSM-5 disorders and the disorders in the U.S.’s ICD-9-CM and forthcoming ICD-10-CM.

Or, whether the legislative document relies on a cross-walk between DSM-5 disorders and ICD-10-AM codes developed specifically in relation to the ICD-10-AM Eighth Edition, July 2013.

I will update this post when I have received clarification.

According to this page: http://nccc.uow.edu.au/icd10am-achi-acs/overview/icd10am/index.html

“[Australia's] ICD-10-AM has also enjoyed more widespread use, having been assessed, found suitable and adopted by many other countries, including: New Zealand, Ireland, Singapore, Slovenia.”

I am unable to confirm how many countries that have adopted ICD-10-AM have migrated from earlier editions to the July 2013 edition or are preparing to migrate to the most recent edition.

Other clinical modifications (CMs) of ICD-10:

Canada (ICD-10-CA): The most recent edition of ICD-10-CA is the 2009 edition Volume One: Tabular List 2009. Canada is anticipated to adopt a CM of ICD-11 before the U.S. does, but in meantime, an updated edition of ICD-10-CA might be anticipated, especially given the recent extension to the ICD-11 development timeline. Canadians will need to be alert to the potential for addition of SSD as an inclusion term to the next edition of ICD-10-CA.

Germany (ICD-10-GM): There is an ICD-10-GM version for 2014. There is no SSD under F45.x or under any other code, but watch for any updated versions released prior to transition to a CM of ICD-11.

Thailand (ICD-10-TM): There does not appear to be a more recent version of the Thai clinical modification than the online version for 2007, but watch for SSD in any updated versions prior to potential transition to a CM of ICD-11. ICD-10-TM Online version for 2007.

ICD-11 Beta drafting platform:

There is no documentary evidence of a proposal to add SSD, per se, to ICD-11. However, the wording for the Definition for Bodily distress disorder, as it currently stands in the Beta drafting platform, is drawn from the Gureje, Creed 2012 paper on the S3DWG sub working group’s emerging proposals for ICD-11 [1].

The paper described a simplified disorder framework – a construct into which DSM-5′s Somatic Symptom Disorder could be comfortably integrated, thus facilitating harmonization between the respective ICD-11 and DSM-5 disorder construct and criteria replacements for the Somatoform disorders classifications.

As with DSM-5′s SSD, for the emerging proposals for BDD, the focus was not on symptoms counts, or on strict symptom patterns or clusters from one or more body systems, or on whether symptoms were determined as being “medically explained” or “medically unexplained,” but on the perception of disproportionate or maladaptive psychobehavioural responses to, or excessive preoccupation with any troublesome chronic bodily symptom(s). And that in doing away with the “unreliable assumption of its causality” the diagnosis of BDD would not exclude the presence of a co-occurring physical health condition – which is very close to SSD’s defining characteristics.

1. Creed F, Gureje O. Emerging themes in the revision of the classification of somatoform disorders. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2012 Dec;24(6):556-67. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23244611 [Abstract. Full text behind paywall]

2] On the Patient.co.uk site, a peer reviewed article on Somatic symptom disorder:

http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/somatic-symptom-disorder

This article is not a recommendation and it draws heavily on the DSM-IV and current ICD-10 Somatoform disorders framework, criteria and literature. Though it does highlight that DSM-5 has a new, simplified framework and reformulated criteria that rely less on strict patterns of somatic symptoms and more on the degree to which a patient’s thoughts, feelings and behaviours about their symptoms are considered disproportionate or excessive; that for DSM-5, “medically unexplained” is de-emphasized – symptoms may or may not be associated with another medical condition and patients with organic comorbidities such as heart disease, osteoarthritis or cancer, who would have previously been excluded under DSM-IV, can now be included in the diagnosis of SSD.

There is little published research examining the reliability, utility, epidemiology, clinical characteristics or treatment of Somatic symptom disorder as a diagnostic construct and none of the article’s references are for papers specifically using the new Somatic symptom disorder criteria.

3] Somatic symptom disorder in a BMJ Rapid Response:

Rapid Response to: Clinical Review, Fibromyalgia by Anisur Rahman, Martin Underwood, Dawn Carnes [Full text for Clinical Review behind paywall]

http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g1224/rr/689294

Rapid Response: Fibromyalgia: an unhelpful diagnosis for both patients and doctors [Full text for Rapid Response accessible]

Christopher Bass, consultant in liaison psychiatry, John Radcliffe Hospital , Oxford OX3 9DU

Dr Max Henderson, senior lecturer in Epidemiology and Occupational psychiatry, Inststitute of psychiatry, Kings College London 

According to the authors, fibromyalgia ( coded in ICD-10 under Chapter XXIII Diseases of the musculoskeletal system and connective tissue, at M79.7 ) is more appropriately described in terms of “polysymptomatic distress”; “polysymptomatic distress has been recognised as a somatoform disorder, specifically as a somatic symptom disorder or SSD,” and that since “FM overlaps with other disorders with medically unexplained symptoms such as irritable bowel syndrome and chronic fatigue syndrome” it is more appropriate to treat them with multidisciplinary teams within the same specialised service in the general hospital.

4] This commentary by infectious disease specialist, Judy Stone, MD, at Scientific American blogs, mentions concerns around SSD:

Have Pain? Are You Crazy? Rare Diseases Pt. 2

By Judy Stone | February 18, 2014

“It’s all in your head,” patients with unexplained pain or unexpected symptoms often hear…

5] Halifax Somatic Symptoms Disorder Trial

http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02076867

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02076867

Sponsor: Capital District Health Authority, Canada

The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of Intensive Short-Term Dynamic Psychotherapy (ISTDP) plus Medical Care As Usual (MCAU) compared to MCAU for Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders (SSRD). Consenting patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected SSRD will be randomly allocated to receive either 8 weekly individual sessions of ISTDP or to an 8-week wait list followed by ISTDP. MCAU including emergency department and/or family doctor consultation is available throughout trial participation. The primary outcome measure is participant self-reported somatic symptoms at week 8.

 

Update on proposal to add DSM-5′s Somatic symptom disorder to ICD-10-CM

Post #302 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-3PE

Update at April 5, 2014: Implementation of the U.S.’s forthcoming adaptation of ICD-10, ICD-10-CM, has been kicked further down the road to October 1, 2015. Bill H.R. 4302, known as the PAM Act (Protecting Access to Medicare Act) was signed by President Obama on April 1, 2014. This means that the U.S. won’t now transition from ICD-9-CM to ICD-10-CM for another year. CMS has yet to issue a statement or update its webpages.

Update at April 5, 2014: The Summary of the March 19–20, 2014 meeting of the ICD-10-CM/PCS Coordination and Maintenance Committee meeting has now been posted

Lots of “outrage” over SSD and DSM-5 but I see little evidence of sustained “outrage” over proposals to add SSD as an Inclusion term to the U.S.’s ICD-10-CM.

If NCHS rubber stamps the addition of Somatic Symptom Disorder to ICD-10-CM it could leverage the future replacement of the existing Somatoform disorders categories with this new, poorly validated single SSD diagnostic construct, bringing ICD-10-CM in line with DSM-5.

There are implications for ICD-11, too.

Once SSD is inserted into ICD-10-CM, the presence of this term within the U.S. adaptation of ICD-10 may make it easier for ICD-11 Revision Steering Group to justify proposals to replace the existing ICD-10 Somatoform disorders categories with a single, new ICD construct contrived to incorporate SSD-like characteristics and facilitate harmonization between ICD-11 and DSM-5 disorder terms and diagnostic criteria.

+++
This post updates on proposals at the March meeting of the ICD-10-CM/PCS Coordination and Maintenance Committee to add DSM-5′s controversial new Somatic symptom disorder to ICD-10-CM.

But first, a necessary recap of the September meeting:

ICD-10-CM/PCS Coordination and Maintenance Committee meetings provide a public forum to discuss proposed changes to the U.S.’s forthcoming ICD-10-CM and ICD-10-PCS, scheduled for implementation on October 1, 2014.

The meetings, which are co-chaired by representatives for CMS and NCHS, take place, in public, in March and September, followed by public comment periods.

The fall meeting of the ICD-10-CM/PCS Coordination and Maintenance Committee was held on September 18–19, 2013.

On Day Two of the September meeting, American Psychiatric Association’s Darrel Regier, MD, had proposed six new DSM-5 disorders for inclusion in ICD-10-CM.

On Page 45 and 46 of the Diagnosis Agenda, under Additional Tabular List Inclusion Terms for ICD-10-CM, a number of other changes to specific Chapter 5 F codes had also been proposed. These were introduced en masse, by CDC’s Donna Picket. (Reached on Day Two, at 1:22:21 in from the start of Videocast Four.)

This section of the Diagnosis Agenda included the proposals to add the new DSM-5 disorders: Somatic symptom disorder (proposed to Add as Inclusion term to F45.1 Undifferentiated somatoform disorder) and Illness anxiety disorder (proposed to Add as Inclusion term to F45.21 Hypochondriasis) to ICD-10-CM’s Chapter 5 codes.

(F45.1 and F45.21 are the ICD-10-CM codes to which these two new APA disorders are already cross-walked in the DSM-5.)

ICD10CM 4

Source: Page 45, Diagnosis Agenda (Topic Packet), September 18–19, 2013 ICD-10-CM/PCS Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting

+++
Videocasts of the entire September 2013 meeting proceedings, Diagnosis Agenda (Topic Packet), Procedural Agenda, Meeting materials etc can be found in Dx Revision Watch Post #277.

Note: there was no proposal at the September 2013 meeting to create a unique code for either Somatic symptom disorder (SSD) or Illness anxiety disorder, for either 2014 or October 1, 2015 implementation, and no proposal that Somatic symptom disorder should replace or subsume any of the existing ICD-10-CM F45.x Somatoform disorders. Note also, these proposals are specific to the forthcoming U.S. clinical modification of ICD-10.

In relation to the section of the Agenda on Pages 45 and 46, CDC’s, Donna Picket, had stated:

1:22:21 in: Diagnosis Agenda: “Additional Tabular List Inclusion Terms for ICD-10-CM”
Donna Pickett (CDC): “…And just to complete the package, there are other Tabular List proposals that appear on Page 45 and 46 that we would also invite your comments on. And again, with some of the terminology changes that Dr Regier has described the intent here is to make sure that if those terms are being used, that they do have a home somewhere within ICD-10-CM to facilitate people looking these up. So we invite comments. We’re showing the Tabular List proposed changes; however, there obviously would be associated Alphabetic Index changes with that which we didn’t show just to keep the package a little bit smaller…”
Source: [Unofficial transcription from Video Four, September 2013 ICD-9-CM C & M Committee meeting.]

There were no questions or comments from the floor or by phone link on any of the proposals listed on Pages 45 and 46 under “Additional Tabular List Inclusion Terms for ICD-10-CM” and no discussion or queries on any of the individual proposals listed under under this section of the Agenda between the meeting co-chairs and APA’s, Dr Regier.

NCHS’s decision on proposals to add Somatic symptom disorder (SSD) and Illness anxiety disorder as Inclusion terms to ICD-10-CM Tabular List Chapter 5, and to also add to the Index, isn’t known and may not be evident until the next ICD-10-CM Addenda is released, later this year, or the Final Addenda released.

Some of the objections submitted to the proposal to add Somatic symptom disorder (SSD) as an Inclusion term in ICD-10-CM are collated on Dx Revision Watch here.

+++

March meeting of the ICD-10-CM/PCS Coordination and Maintenance Committee

This meeting took place on March 19–20, 2014. I was unable to attend as I live in the UK.

The ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM Timeline and Diagnosis and Procedure Codes Agenda (Topic Packet) can be found here, on the CDC website:

Proposals (Topic Packet) March 19-20, 2014

Procedure Agenda, Meeting Materials and Handouts can be downloaded from Zip files here, on the CMS website:

Meeting Materials March 19-20, 2014

A Summary Report of the Diagnosis part of the meeting is scheduled to be posted on the NCHS website, in June.

A Summary Report of the Procedure part of the meeting is scheduled to be posted on the CMS website, in June.

April 17, 2014: Deadline for receipt of public comments on proposed procedure code revisions discussed at the March 19, 2014 ICD-10 Coordination and Maintenance Committee meeting for implementation on October 1, 2014.

June 20, 2014: Deadline for receipt of public comments on proposed code revisions discussed at the March 19–20 meeting for implementation on October 1, 2015.

ICD-10-CM is currently subject to a partial code freeze. During the freeze, the public will be asked to comment on whether or not a proposal should be approved, and if not, why; and whether requests for new diagnosis or procedure codes should be created based on the criteria of the need to capture a new technology or disease. Any code requests that do not meet the criteria will be evaluated for implementation within ICD-10-CM on and after October 1, 2015 once the partial freeze has ended.

Comments on the diagnosis proposals presented at the ICD Coordination and Maintenance Committee meeting should be sent, preferably by email, to the following address by June 20th deadline: nchsicd9CM@cdc.gov

+++

The Two Day proceedings were streamed live and can be watched on YouTube:

Video One: Day One: Morning Session: Procedural Codes: 2014 Mar 19th, FY 2014 ICD-10 Coordination and Maintenance Committee

+++
Video Two: Day One: Afternoon Session: Procedural Codes: 2014 Mar 19th, FY 2014 ICD-10 Coordination and Maintenance Committee

+++
Video Three: Day Two: Diagnosis Codes: 2014 Mar 20th, FY 2014 ICD-10 Coordination and Maintenance Committee

+++
Page 64, Topic Packet: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/icd/Topic_packet_3_19_2014.pdf

[Extract]

Chapter 5 Addenda

The American Psychiatric Association (APA) proposes the following addenda changes to the ICD-10-CM Tabular and Index, specifically to Chapter 5, Mental, Behavioral and Neurodevelopmental disorders (F01-F99).

The APA indicates that these revisions are necessary because DSM-5 contains several new diagnoses, as well as new disorder titles, that do not map well to any existing ICD-10-CM codes.

Because of this, they are proposing numerous new index entries and tabular inclusion terms to ensure that coders can correctly identify the codes to use. The APA proposes that these changes will also ensure that new DSM-5 disorder titles correspond to a valid ICD-10-CM code.

Many of the changes in the proposed addenda relate to the reconceptualization of the substance use disorders from having separate disorder names and codes for substance abuse and dependence. However, extensive scientific evidence was assembled to show that, rather than existing as two separate disorders, these conditions exist on a spectrum that the APA has now conceptualized as ranging from mild to moderate to severe. In order to make the closest approximations with existing ICD-10-CM codes, it is noted that codes for mild substance use disorders correspond to the abuse codes and codes for moderate and severe substance use disorders correspond to dependence codes. The APA may recommend changes in the structure and names of ICD-10-CM substance related disorders, in the future, however at the present time they are only recommending the addition of the new terminology as inclusion terms.

The following addenda are proposed for implementation on October 1, 2015

[...]

1:12:12 in from start of YouTube Three: Chapter 5 Addenda Proposed Tabular Modifications.

1:12:12 Beth Fisher (CMS): Introduces proposals for [Tabular] modifications from APA for Chapter 5. These are all Addenda type changes because [ICD-10-CM is] in code freeze mode, we didn’t have the opportunity to do new codes just yet. Hands podium to Darrel Regier, MD.

1:13:01 Darrel Regier (APA): Mapping DSM-5 to ICD-10-CM codes; Major change to rename Dementias group to Major Neurocognitive Disorders, because including in this group some neurocognitive deficit conditions such as Traumatic brain injury and other neurocognitive disorders that are not inherently some of the neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s, Picks Disease. (Page 64 Diagnosis Agenda)

1:14:02 Darrel Regier (APA): We’ve also introduced [in DSM-5] a Mild neurocognitive disorder that reflects the Mild cognitive impairment, MCI, that is currently in ICD-9, ICD-10…

1:15:06 Darrel Regier (APA): A lot of significant changes to substance abuse disorder area which will require some notes and guidelines…

1:15:27 Darrel Regier (APA): [APA has] a number of new disorders…15 new disorders that are in the DSM-5, but there were 50 disorders that were actually subsumed into a spectrum of conditions that dropped the total number of disorders by something like 28; so you had 50 disorders that collapsed into 22 disorders. Among those, some of the most prominent – Aspergers, Autism, Pervasive developmental disorder NOS, into a single Autism spectrum disorder…assessed on two domains…assessed in terms of level of severity instead of categorical distinctions…

1:17:04 Darrel Regier (APA): Eliminating distinction between abuse and dependence so that on a continuum of Mild, Moderate, Severe…no strict separation between abuse category and dependence…

1:21:00: Question from floor re Alcohol abuse, Alcohol dependence.

1:31:15 Beth Fisher (CDC): Some of these Inclusion terms may have been proposed at September 2013 meeting. (But does not explain the reason for their being resubmitted at the March meeting.)

1:31:34 Beth Fisher (CDC): Begins running through all Addenda Additions.

1:31:42 Beth Fisher (CDC): At F44 Dissociative and conversion disorders, Add Conversion disorder, in parenthesis, functional neurological symptom disorder as Inclusion term.

March 2014 C and M meeting Conversion disorder (FNSD)

Source: ICD-10-CM C & M Committee meeting, March 20, 2014, Screenshot Video Three

Note, there was no proposal under these Proposed Tabular Modifications to Add Somatic symptom disorder as Inclusion term to F45.1 Undifferentiated somatoform disorder to the Tabular List. But the proposal to Add Somatic symptom disorder as an Inclusion term to F45.1 Undifferentiated somatoform disorder to the Tabular List and to the Alphabetical Index had been proposed at the September 2013 meeting.

Also, no proposal to Add Illness anxiety disorder to the Tabular List, but again, this had been proposed at the September 2013 meeting (under F45.21), for both the Tabular List and the Index. (Decisions on all four of these September 2013 meeting proposals are unknown.)

1:34:06 Beth Fisher (CMS): Concludes proposed Addenda Additions to Chapter 5 Tabular List.

1:34:12 Beth Fisher (CMS) Moves onto Proposed Index Modifications from Page 82, Topic Packet.

1:42:36 Beth Fisher (CMS) Page 89: [Under main Index term "Disorder"] And then Somatic symptom disorder to F45.1.

Page 89, Diagnosis Agenda Add Somatic symptom disorder

March14 ICD-10-CM Cand M SSD to Index

Source: ICD-10-CM C & M Committee meeting, March 20, 2014, Screenshot Video Three

(No comments from floor regarding proposal to Add SSD to Index, or queries in respect of outcome of September meeting proposals. It was not feasible for me to participate in this meeting via phone link from UK to query.)

Note, there was no proposal under Proposed Index Modifications to add Illness anxiety disorder to the Index, but this proposal had been included in the September 2013 Topic Packet. Why SSD has been resubmitted for consideration for addition ro the Index at the March 2014 meeting is unclear, and as I say, the outcome of proposals for the September meeting for both SSD and IAD to be added to both Tabular List and to Index is unknown.

1:44:25 Beth Fisher (CMS): Concludes proposed Addenda Additions to Chapter 5 Alphabetical Index. Invites comments.

1:44:26: Questions from floor regarding Alcohol; Cannabis; Cocaine use; Implications for legal differences between states for use of cannabis. Question regarding Neurodegeneration due to alcohol.

1:50.02 Beth Fisher (CMS): Other Addenda (Ed: presumably Tab and Index Addenda on pp 91–93 and 93–97) were reached on Day One, as there was time, so not being presenting on Day Two. Invites further comments.

1:50.27 Donna Picket (CDC): Adjourns meeting. Reminds floor (and participants via phone link/videocasts and non attendees), to submit comments on Diagnosis proposals by June 20 deadline.

1:51:07 Question from floor: Process question: if these proposals are all approved, when will they be approved and when will they be effective, because we want to notify our members of what codes to use?

1:51:32: Donna Pickett (CDC): All of these being presented were for consideration for implementation in October 1, 2015. Within 2015, we have a huge body of work that has been accumulating during partial code freeze and we’ve encouraged comments to come in about the timing for making the Final Addenda available. The typical time frame we have used in the past is posting [Addenda] in June and proposals to become effective October 1, of that same year. However, issues have arisen because there is a huge body of work and it was mentioned, yesterday, [during Meeting Day One] that the industry may want to have an Addenda released earlier and we invited comment on that, because of the amount of work that would need to go into incorporating the changes into the relevant systems and programs etc. If we were to stay with the traditional process, the Addenda would be made available in June. Meeting concluded.

Comments on the diagnosis proposals presented at the ICD-10-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee meeting should be sent, preferably by email, to the following address by June 20th deadline: nchsicd9CM@cdc.gov

Clarification: Coalition for Diagnostic Rights

A website called Coalition for Diagnostic Rights has recently been launched.
The site includes references to Suzy Chapman and to Dx Revision Watch.
Suzy Chapman/Dx Revision Watch is not associated with or affiliated to the Coalition for Diagnostic Rights website or with any organization associated with that site, and has no responsibility for content published on that site, or published in the name of that site on other platforms.
Suzy Chapman
Dx Revision Watch

Joint Open letter to WHO/ICD Revision over classification of absent G93.3 terms for ICD-11 Beta draft

Post #301 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-3Pp

Today, Sonya Chawdhury, CEO, Action for M.E., has released an Open Letter to Dr Ra’ad Shakir, Chair, ICD-11 Revision Topic Advisory Group for Neurology.

The Open Letter has been copied to Tarun Dua, Managing Editor, Neurology Topic Advisory Group, WHO; Christopher Chute, Chair, ICD Revision Steering Group, WHO; Dr Geoffrey Reed, Senior Project Officer, International Advisory Group for the Revision of ICD-10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders, ICD-11, WHO; Dr Margaret Chan, Director General, WHO; Dr Robert Jakob, MD, Medical Adviser, WHO.

In the interests of transparency, I have acted in an advisory capacity in the preparation of this joint letter in respect of existing ICD-10 coding, proposals for the G93.3 terms for ICD-11, as they had stood in January 2013, and around Beta drafting platform technicalities.

http://www.actionforme.org.uk/get-informed/news/policy-and-campaigns/open-letter-to-who-over-classification

Open letter to WHO over classification

18 March, 2014

Action for M.E.

Chief Executive Sonya Chowdhury has written an open letter to Dr Ra’ad Shakir, Chair of the World Health Organisation neurology topic advisory group, regarding concerns over the classification of M.E./CFS in the WHO ICD-11.

There has been concern within the M.E. community that the three ICD-10 G93.3 terms, PVFS (Postviral Fatigue Syndrome), BME (Benign Myalgic Encephalomyelitis) and CFS (Chronic Fatigue Syndrome) have been missing from the public version of ICD-11 Beta draft since early 2013.

The letter which has been produced collectively, is also signed by Annette Brooke MP, Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on M.E., the Countess of Mar, Chair of the House of Lords-led group Forward ME, and Dr Charles Shepherd, Medical Adviser of the ME Association who, like Sonya, is a member of the APPG secretariat.

The PDF of the joint letter can be read here:

http://www.actionforme.org.uk/Resources/Action%20for%20ME/Documents/get-informed/who-icd-11-letter-17-3-14-sc.pdf

Open PDF here:  Click link for PDF document   Joint Open Letter to WHO/ICD 03.18.14

Text

OPEN LETTER

Dr Ra’’ad Shakir
Chair, WHO Neurology Topic Advisory Group
Chief of Neurology
Imperial College NHS Trust
Charing Cross Hospital
London

17th March 2014

Dear Dr Shakir

Re: WHO ICD-11 Beta draft classification

We are writing, collectively, on behalf of the estimated 250,000 people with M.E./CFS. in the UK.

As you may be aware, there has been considerable discussion and concern expressed within the M.E./CFS community regarding the WHO ICD-11 classification.

As both individuals and organisations, we have received a number of questions and concerns from people affected by M.E./CFS and are therefore writing to seek clarification to enable us to respond accordingly.

We are keen to work collaboratively with others to help empower and support people affected by M.E. and as such, would be very happy to discuss this further with you directly or welcome you to a meeting of either the All Party Parliamentary Group on M.E. or Forward M.E. (a House of Lords-led collaboration).

A summary of our current understanding

The three ICD-10 G93.3 terms, PVFS (Postviral fatigue syndrome), BME (Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis) and CFS (Chronic fatigue syndrome) have been missing from the public version of ICD-11 Beta draft since early 2013.

Prior to early 2013, in the public version of the ICD-11 Beta drafting platform, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome had been listed in the Foundation Component as an ICD Title entity under Diseases of the nervous system, with Benign Myalgic encephalomyelitis specified as an Inclusion term and Postviral fatigue syndrome listed under Synonyms to the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Title entity. Therefore, all three terms were accounted for within the Beta draft; the terms were then removed from the public version of the Beta draft.

Currently, no entry for any of the terms, CFS, BME or PVFS, under any hierarchy, can be found within any chapter of ICD-11 Beta in the Foundation or the Morbidity and Mortality linearization, the top level category list, the PDF print version or the PDF Alphabetical Index.

The replies that WHO Twitter admin gave to members of the public who enquired about this, stated that there was no proposal to include ME, CFS or Fybromyalgia as Mental and behavioural disorders in ICD-11. They did not say (as Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health, Jane Ellison MP stated in response to a question from Annette Brooke MP) “no proposal to reclassify ME/CFS in ICD-11 ”(¹ Hansard, House of Commons, Oral Answers to Questions, Tuesday, February 25, 2014).

A member of the public also asked on Twitter if there is a proposal to reclassify ME, CFS and Fybromyalgia as “Bodily Distress Disorders” in ICD-11, but no reply was forthcoming from WHO Twitter Admin. Also, they did not confirm a proposal to ‘retain’ in Chapter 07, only not to include in Chapter 05.

Points of clarification requested

1. Under which chapters and parent categories are the following three ICD-10 G93.3 entities currently proposed to be classified within ICD-11:

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome;
Benign Myalgic encephalomyelitis;
Postviral fatigue syndrome?

2. What is the current proposed hierarchy or relationship within ICD-11 between these three entities, in terms of Title term, Inclusion term, Synonym, and which of these three terms are proposed to be assigned a Definition and other “Content Model” parameters?

3. What is the reason for these three terms not currently displaying in the public version of the Beta drafting platform?

4. When does ICD-11 Revision intend to restore these three terms to the public version of the Beta drafting platform?

We very much appreciate you taking the time to respond to our request and look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

Sonya Chowdhury, CEO, Action for M.E.; Secretariat, All Party Parliamentary Group on M.E.
Annette Brook MP; Chair, All Party Parliamentary Group on M.E.
Countess of Mar; Forward M.E., House of Lords
Dr Charles Shepherd, Medical Adviser, ME Association; Secretariat, All Party Parliamentary Group on M.E.

c.c.Tarun Dua, Managing Editor, Neurology Topic Advisory Group, WHO
Christopher Chute, Chair, ICD Revision Steering Group, WHO
Dr Geoffrey Rees [sic], Project Manager, Mental & Behavioural Chapter, ICD-11, WHO
Dr Margaret Chan, Director General, WHO
Dr Robert Jakob, MD, Medical Adviser, WHO

Action for M.E.
PO Box 2778
Bristol BS1 9DJ

Update to: Oral Response to Oral Question tabled by Annette Brooke MP, House of Commons, February 25, 2014

Post #300 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-3Pa

This post is an update to Post #297: Oral Response to Oral Question tabled by Annette Brooke MP, House of Commons, February 25, 2014

On February 26, I submitted a formal query to the office for Ministerial Correspondence and Public Enquiries, Department of Health.

Query Ref: DE00000844965

Re: Answer by The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Jane Ellison) in response to Oral Question, February 25, 2014 House of Commons

11. Annette Brooke (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD) ME/CFS

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health (Jane Ellison) Oral Response included the statement:

“No discussions have taken place between the Department and the WHO on the reclassification of ME/CFS, but the WHO has publicly stated that there is no proposal to reclassify ME/CFS in ICD-11.”

I should be grateful if you could clarify the source for the WHO public statement which informed Ms Ellison’s response to Annette Brooke.

Suzy Chapman
etc

On March 17, I received a response:

As posted on @dxrevisionwatch via TwitLonger: http://tl.gd/n_1s1115s

Mr Patel includes links for two Twitter responses to members of the public. One from @WHO admin (unsigned) and the second from Mr Gregory Härtl, Head of Public Relations/Social Media at WHO.

Mr Härtl had responded to a posting of a link to a since closed petition. Mr Härtl’s response needs to be read in the context of the tweet to which he had responded, so although it is useful to have confirmation of a second signed source (from WHO PR/Social Media), it cannot be used as a “stand alone” public statement. If reposting please repost in full, unedited, and with this preamble.

Response: Ref: DE00000844965 – Re: February 25, 2014 Oral Questions, House of Commons, Annette Brooke (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)

Received: March 17, 2014

Thank you for your recent emails to Jane Ellison and the Department of Health about the classification of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME). I have been asked to reply. Please accept this as a response to both of your emails.

The Department understands that this issue is a complex and emotive issue, and that it is of concern to many people.

The World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) public statement was made on Twitter, where it stated that ‘Fibromyalgia and ME/CFS are not included as Mental & Behavioural Disorders in ICD-10, [and that] there is no proposal to do so for ICD-11’. The message can be viewed at the following link:

In addition, on 14 February, Mr Gregory Hartl, Head of Public Relations/Social Media at WHO, stated that ‘there is and never was any intention to [reclassify Fibromyalgia and ME/CFS as a Mental and Behavioural Disorder]’. The relevant message, and its context, can be seen at:

Finally, you may wish to participate in the development of the eleventh version of WHO’s International Classification of Diseases (ICD). Information about becoming involved in the revision to the ICD is available on the following page:

http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/revision/en/

I hope this reply is helpful.

Yours sincerely,

Rahul Patel
Ministerial Correspondence and Public Enquiries
Department of Health

Gregory Härtl, Head of Public Relations/Social Media at WHO, response to member of public via Twitter:

Gregory_Hartl_WHO_PR

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 134 other followers

%d bloggers like this: