A proposal for the ICD-10 G93.3 legacy terms for ICD-11: Part Two
April 3, 2017
Post #330 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-4eH or http://bit.ly/ICD11proposal
For background to Part Two see: A proposal for the ICD-10 G93.3 legacy terms for ICD-11: Part One
Update: A PDF Q & A for our proposals can downloaded here
In the World Health Organization’s ICD-10, the terms, “postviral fatigue syndrome,” “benign myalgic encephalomyelitis,” and “chronic fatigue syndrome,” are all classified to G93.3, in the neurological chapter, as below:
Image source: ICD-10 Version: 2016
The next edition of ICD (ICD-11) is scheduled for release at some point in 2018, following presentation at the World Health Assembly (WHA), in May 2018.
The WHO work group with responsibility for the G93.3 legacy categories removed the terms from the publicly accessible version of the ICD-11 Beta draft, in early 2013, while they deliberated over how these categories should be represented in ICD-11.
On March 26, after a four year absence from the draft, “Team WHO” finally restored the G93.3 terms to the Beta platform.
Two long standing proposals for inserting exclusions under Fatigue for Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis and Chronic fatigue syndrome were also approved on March 26.
The three G93.3 legacy terms were returned to their 2009 Beta location with this caveat:
“While the optimal place in the classification is still being identified, the entity has been put back to its original place in ICD.”
This suggests that we should view this as a “placeholder” and that the Topic Advisory Group for Neurology may release revised proposals later this year.
WHO has confirmed there is no intention to classify the terms under the Mental or behavioural disorders chapter or under the Symptoms, signs chapter.
How does the draft currently stand?
All three terms are currently back under the Neurology chapter, under parent: Other disorders of the nervous system, with PVFS as the lead (or concept title) term. BME and CFS are specified as inclusion terms (so they are coded to the same code as PVFS). All other content on the listing is much as it had stood in the Beta, in 2009.
(This is almost the same hierarchy as in ICD-10, except CFS is now included in the ICD-11 equivalent of the Tabular List, whereas in ICD-10, CFS is included only in the Index. Canada, Germany and the U.S. already have all three terms in their Tabular Lists.)
This is how the terms currently appear in the Beta draft:
In view of the caveat, it remains unclear what Topic Advisory Group for Neurology might still be considering for these terms, when they will reach consensus, or whether alternative proposals might be released at some point.
There was a proposals deadline on Thursday, March 30. Proposals received after this date may have to wait until after the ICD-11 is tested and released to be considered for inclusion in the first annual update of ICD-11, in 2019.
A proposal for ICD-11
To ensure that these terms are present and appropriately classified in ICD-11, U.S. advocate Mary Dimmock and I have collaborated on the preparation of a proposal for the restructure of the ICD-10 G93.3 category terms: Postviral fatigue syndrome; Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis; and Chronic fatigue syndrome.
We submitted a formal and fully referenced proposal on March 27.
Our proposal recommends:
- that the terms should be retained in the neurological chapter (Chapter 08: Diseases of the nervous system);
- that the terms should be retained under the parent class: Other disorders of the nervous system;
- that ME and CFS should each be assigned separate codes;
- that PVFS is not an appropriate title term for ME to sit under (not all cases of ME are preceded by a virus).
We’ve also recommended:
- reciprocal exclusions for “Bodily distress disorder” and for general Fatigue;
- that the designation “Benign” should be dropped for ICD-11.
Our proposed restructure for ICD-11 looks like this:
Viewing our proposal
In order to view our Proposal in the Beta “Proposal Mechanism” you will first need to register with the Beta platform (this only takes a minute or two and you can register, if you wish, using an existing social media, Yahoo, Google or MS account).
Register for access here: http://bit.ly/ICD11Registrationpage
There is a WHO tutorial video on how to register, here: http://bit.ly/ICD11regtutorial
Once you are registered and logged in, go straight to this page to view and comment on our Proposal: http://bit.ly/commentICD11
For ease of access, we’ve put a copy of our Proposal and Rationale into a PDF, which you can download here:
We’re inviting patient and advocacy organizations and other stakeholders to review and comment on our Proposal.
Comments will only be accepted via the Beta “Proposal Mechanism” – so don’t send comments directly to ICD Revision.
If you are commenting on behalf of an organization, please state the organization’s name and in what capacity.
The Comment box for our proposal is located right at the bottom of the web page:
You won’t be able to edit or delete your comment once it’s been submitted ‒ so you may want to prepare a draft, first. You can include references to papers, reports etc in support of your comments but you won’t be able to upload files ‒ and it’s a plain text field only.
At the moment, it’s not clear what date comments on proposals will need to be received by in order to be taken into consideration for the version of ICD-11 that is scheduled for release in 2018. But we are recommending that comments are submitted within the next couple of weeks.
As well as commenting on our proposal, now that ICD Revision has restored the three terms to the draft, you may also comment on how the draft currently stands, here: http://bit.ly/2o8lhMA
If you have an queries please contact Suzy Chapman via the Contact Form.
Here’s the PDF again Suzy Chapman, Mary Dimmock Proposal for ICD-11
And here’s the URL again for our proposal on the Beta draft Proposal Mechanism
For a good overview of ICD-11’s structure and functionality by NHS Digital click here