US “Clinical Modification” ICD-10-CM

US “Clinical Modification” ICD-10-CM

Post #45 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-Ka

This post is intended to clarify any confusion between ICD-10, ICD-11 and the forthcoming US Clinical Modification of ICD-10, ICD-10-CM.

The WHO published ICD-10 in 1992. The current version of ICD-10 (Version for 2007) is used in the UK and in many countries throughout the world.

ICD-10 is under revision and the development of the structure and content of ICD-11 has been underway since 2007. ICD-11 is scheduled for completion in 2014.

 
Clinical Modifications

Several countries are permitted to publish adaptations of the ICD called “Clinical Modifications” (sometimes known as “national modifications”).

Countries using Clinical Modifications of ICD-10 include Canada (ICD-10-CA), Australia (ICD-10-AM) and Germany (ICD-10-GM).

The United States currently uses an adaptation of the WHO’s now retired ICD-9, called ICD-9-CM, and has been slow to move onto ICD-10.

Rather than skip ICD-10 and move straight onto ICD-11 in 2014+, the US CDC has been developing a modification of ICD 10 called ICD-10-CM which will replace ICD-9-CM.

ICD-10-CM is US specific and is due for implementation in October 2013.

According to one report, the US should not expect to move on to ICD-11 (or a modification of ICD-11) until well after 2020, assuming that ICD-11 is published around the 2014-2015 projection:

Why move to ICD-10, if ICD-11 is on the horizon?
http://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/news/why-move-icd-10-if-icd-11-horizon
 

What are the proposed classifications and codings for PVFS, (Benign) ME and Chronic fatigue syndrome for ICD-10-CM?

In March 2001, the document:

“A Summary of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Its Classification in the International Classification of Diseases Prepared by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, Office of the Center Director, Data Policy and Standards”

provided a concise “summary of the classification of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD), ninth and tenth revisions, and their clinical modifications.”

That document is archived here: http://www.co-cure.org/ICD_code.pdf

In 2001, the proposal had been:

“In keeping with the placement in the ICD-10, chronic fatigue syndrome (and its synonymous terms) will remain at G93.3 in ICD-10-CM.”

So at that point, it was being proposed for the forthcoming US ICD-10-CM that PVFS, (Benign) ME and Chronic fatigue syndrome would be coded at G93.3, which would have placed all three terms in Chapter VI: Diseases of the nervous system (the Neurological chapter).

But the current proposals for ICD-10-CM propose classifying Chronic fatigue syndrome in Chapter 18, under R53 Malaise and fatigue, at R53.82.

The “R” codes are classified under

CHAPTER 18 (XVIII)
Symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings, not elsewhere classified (R00-R99)

This chapter includes symptoms, signs, abnormal results of clinical or other investigative procedures, and ill defined conditions regarding which no diagnosis classifiable elsewhere is recorded…

Note: this is not the ICD-10-CM Mental and Behavioural chapter, which is:

CHAPTER 5 (V)
Mental and behavioral disorders (F01-F99)
Includes: disorders of psychological development
Excludes2: symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical laboratory findings, not elsewhere classified (R00-R99)

which specifically excludes the R00-R99 codes.

So the current proposal for ICD-10-CM separates CFS and Postviral fatigue syndrome into mutually exclusive categories:

“Chronic fatigue, unspecified” and “Chronic fatigue syndrome not otherwise specified” appear in Chapter 18, under R53 Malaise and fatigue, at R53.82.

Whilst “Postviral fatigue syndrome” and “benign myalgic encephalomyelitis” appear in Chapter 6, under G93 Other disorders of brain, at G93.3.

At some point before October 2013, ICD-10-CM revision will be “frozen” for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and insurance companies to prepare for the October 1, 2013 implementation.

See Tom Sullivan at ICD10 Watch.com (no connection with my site) here:

CMS, CDC call for ICD-9 and ICD-10 code freeze
http://icd10watch.com/headline/cms-cdc-call-icd-9-and-icd-10-code-freeze

“CMS, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, along with CDC, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, proposed that both ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM/PCS code sets be frozen two years before the compliance deadline.

“What that means: As of October 1, 2011, only limited updates would be instituted into the code sets so that providers, payers, clearinghouses, and health IT vendors, will not have to simultaneously keep pace with code updates while also reconfiguring their existing systems for ICD-10-CM/PCS.” ICD10 Watch.com

During the last ten minutes of the CFSAC meeting on Monday, 10 May, Dr Lenny Jason raised his concerns with the committee that the placement of CFS in ICD-10-CM in the Chapter 18 “R” codes could be problematic.

Videocast of full CFSAC meeting here:
http://videocast.nih.gov/Summary.asp?File=15884

In August 2005, CFSAC had submitted the following recommendation to the Secretary:

http://www.hhs.gov/advcomcfs/recommendations/082005.html

“Recommendation 10: We would encourage the classification of CFS as a ‘Nervous System Disease,’ as worded in the ICD-10 G93.3.”

I suggest that US advocates with concerns about current proposals for the placement of CFS within ICD-10-CM keep a close eye on decisions about the date by which ICD-10-CM is to be frozen.

For the most recent ICD-10-CM proposals see:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/icd10cm.htm

The 2010 update of ICD-10-CM is now available and replaces the July 2009 version.

The file for the Tabular List is in a Zipped file which is not that easy to locate on the site. A non Zipped PDF can be downloaded from this site:

http://www.cms.gov/ICD10/12_2010_ICD_10_CM.asp#TopOfPage
http://www.cms.gov/ICD10/Downloads/6_I10tab2010.pdf

or open the PDF on my DSM-5 and ICD-11 Watch site, here
https://dxrevisionwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/i10tab2010.pdf

ICD-10-CM CHAPTER 18

Tabular List of Diseases and Injuries Page 1165 (Update for 2010)

      R53 Malaise and fatigue

      […]

      R53.8 Other malaise and fatigue

          Excludes1: combat exhaustion and fatigue (F43.0)
          congenital debility (P96.9)
          exhaustion and fatigue due to:
          depressive episode (F32.-)
          excessive exertion (T73.3)
          exposure (T73.2)
          heat (T67.-)
          pregnancy (O26.8-)
          recurrent depressive episode (F33)
          senile debility (R54)

      R53.81 Other malaise

          Chronic debility
          Debility NOS
          General physical deterioration
          Malaise NOS
          Nervous debility
          Excludes1: age-related physical debility (R54)

     R53.82 Chronic fatigue, unspecified

          Chronic fatigue syndrome NOS
          Excludes1: postviral fatigue syndrome (G93.3)

      R53.83 Other fatigue

          Fatigue NOS
          Lack of energy
          Lethargy
          Tiredness

 

ICD-10-CM CHAPTER 6 Page 325 (Update for 2010)

Diseases of the nervous system (G00-G99)

Excludes2:

[…]
symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical and laboratory findings, not elsewhere classified (R00-R94)

     […]

     G93 Other disorders of brain

      […]

      G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome

          Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis
          Excludes1: chronic fatigue syndrome NOS (R53.82)

For comparison:

German Modification ICD-10-GM
http://www.dimdi.de/static/de/klassi/diagnosen/icd10/htmlgm2010/block-g90-g99.htm

ICD-10-GM Version 2010

Kapitel VI
Krankheiten des Nervensystems
(G00-G99)

G93.- Sonstige Krankheiten des Gehirns

[…]

G93.3 Chronisches Müdigkeitssyndrom

Benigne myalgische Enzephalomyelitis
Chronisches Müdigkeitssyndrom bei Immundysfunktion
Postvirales Müdigkeitssyndrom

For comparison:

Canadian Modification ICD-10-CA

(Version 2009 of ICD-10-CA/CCI replaces version 2006)

http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/dispPage.jsp?cw_page=codingclass_e

Version 2009 ICD-10-CA Tabular List, Volume 1 PDF (4.9MB)
http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/en/downloads/ICD-10-CA_Vol1_2009.pdf

Version 2009 ICD-10-CA Alphabetical Index, Volume 2 PDF (4.3MB)
http://secure.cihi.ca/cihiweb/en/downloads/ICD-10-CA_Vol2_2009.pdf

Chapter VI

Diseases of the nervous system
(G00-G99)

Other disorders of the nervous system
(G90-99)

[…]

G93 Other disorders of brain

[…]

G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome

Includes: Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis
Chronic fatigue syndrome

Excludes: fatigue syndrome NOS (F48.0)

For comparison with WHO ICD-10:

Current ICD-10 codings for the three terms are set out on my site, here, together with extracts from Chapter V (the “F” codes) and Chapter XVIII (the “R” codes):

https://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/icd-11-me-cfs/

or go here for the full ICD-10 Volume 1: Tabular List

http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/

ICD-10 Version for 2007 online
http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/?gg90.htm+g933

Chapter VI

Diseases of the nervous system
(G00-G99)

Other disorders of the nervous system
(G90-99)

[…]

G93 Other disorders of brain

[…]

G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome
           Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis

Note that in ICD-10, Chronic fatigue syndrome is not included in Volume 1: The Tabular List, Chapter VI under the parent term:

             G93 Other Disorders of brain

but “Chronic fatigue syndrome” does appear in Volume 3: The Alphabetical Index, where it is indexed to G93.3.

In a forthcoming post, I shall be publishing important information about proposals for parent terms, classifications and codings in the ICD-11 Alpha Draft.

 

Related material:

ICD-9-CM

For information on the current codings in ICD-9-CM (US Clinical Modification) see the NAME U.S. page:  WHO ICD Codes section

American Psychiatric Association on DSM-5

In a 10 December Press Release, the American Psychiatric Association said:

“Extending the timeline [for DSM-5] will allow more time for public review, field trials and revisions”

and

“The extension will also permit the DSM-5 to better link with the U.S. implementation of the ICD-10-CM codes for all Medicare/Medicaid claims reporting, scheduled for October 1, 2013. Although ICD-10 was published by the WHO in 1990, the “Clinical Modification” version (ICD- 10-CM) authorized by the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is not being implemented in the U.S. until 23 years later.

“The ICD-10-CM includes disorder names, logical groupings of disorders and code numbers but not explicit diagnostic criteria. The APA has already worked with CMS and CDC to develop a common  structure for the currently in-use DSM-IV and the mental disorders section of the ICD- 10-CM.

“The International Classification of Diseases (ICD) is published by the WHO for all member countries to classify diseases and medical conditions for international health care, public health, and statistical use. The WHO plans to release its next version of the ICD, the ICD-11, in 2014.

“APA will continue to work with the WHO to harmonize the DSM-5 with the mental and behavioral disorders section of the ICD-11. Given the timing of the release of both DSM-5 and ICD-11 in relation to the ICD-10-CM, the APA will also work with the CDC and CMS to propose a structure for the U.S. ICD-10 CM that is reflective of the DSM-5 and ICD-11 harmonization efforts. This will be done prior to the time when the ICD-10-CM revisions are “frozen” for CMS and insurance companies to prepare for the October 1, 2013, adoption.”

New WHO YouTube videos: ICD-11 and ICTM

New WHO YouTube videos: ICD-11 and ICTM

Post #44 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-IP

ICD-11 Alpha Draft

It was anticipated that an Alpha Draft for ICD-11 would be ready by 10 May. ICD Revision Steering Group has issued no news release around a launch but I will update as soon as information becomes available.

My previous report “ICD-11 Alpha Draft scheduled to launch between 10 and 17 May” can be read here on DSM-5 and ICD-11 Watch.

 

ICD on YouTube

Two new videos have been added to the WHOICD11 YouTube channel.

WHOICD11 Channel YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/user/WHOICD11

ICD-11 Alpha Draft 11 May 2010 [3.46 mins]

Brief introduction to the development of ICD-11.

ICD-11 ICTM March 2010 [10.40 mins]

International Classification of Traditional Medicine consulation

This three day WHO consultation on traditional medicine was held in Geneva, in March. The meeting discussed a proposal for an International Classification of Traditional Medicine (ICTM) to parallel the ICD.

The ICTM is projected for 2014 as a new member of the WHO Family of International Classifications (WHO FIC). The vision for ICTM is to produce an international, standardised classification system of terminology, definitions, safety and treatment properties for traditional, complementary and alternative medicine according to a common content model.

All 13 ICD YouTube videos are collated on this page on this DSM-5 and ICD-11 Watch site sub page:

ICD-11 YouTubes: http://wp.me/PKrrB-eV

Revision of DSM-5 and ICD-10-CM raised at 10 May CFSAC meeting

Revision of DSM-5 and ICD-10-CM raised at 10 May CFSAC meeting

Post #43 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-HA

A one day public meeting of the US Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Advisory Committee (CFSAC) was held on Monday, 10 May. Minutes of the previous two day meeting and a Videocast of the proceedings of both days (with subtitles) can be accessed here and here.

The Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Advisory Committee (CFSAC) provides advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Health and Human Services via the Assistant Secretary for Health of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on issues related to chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). More information here [PDF].

Towards the end of Monday’s meeting, Dr Leonard Jason, PhD, raised concerns in response to current proposals for the placement of CFS within the forthcoming US “Clinical Modification”, ICD-10-CM, due to be implemented in October 2013. (See this Dx Revision Watch page for current ICD-10-CM proposals.)

Agenda for this Spring 2010 meeting here

CFSAC Agenda – May 10, 2010
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Advisory Committee
US Department of Health and Human Services

Meeting was webcast live at http://videocast.nih.gov 

Webcast of entire meeting with subtitles is now available to view here

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Advisory Committee
Monday, May 10, 2010
HHS Office on Women’s Health (OWH)
Total Running Time: 05:47:57

More information here: http://videocast.nih.gov/Summary.asp?File=15884

Presentations, Public Testimonies and Written Testimonies here

Transcripts are being compiled on a dedicated Facebook site here

YouTubes videos here:

 

New Hillary Johnson blog post – “Sif-Sac, again.” here

Cort Johnson’s blog

A very different looking federal advisory committee on CFS (CFSAC) discussed its charter, its recommendations, XMRV and the blood supply, what the CDC program will look and more. Asst Secretary of Health Dr. Koh, Annette Whittemore and Kim McCleary spoke. Check out the goings on at the CFSAC meeting in

‘The CFSAC on Itself, XMRV, the CDC and More’ from the Bringing the Heat blog:

http://blog.aboutmecfs.org/?p=1540

Phoenix Rising forum thread here

CFSAC Agenda – May 10, 2010

May 10, 2010

9:00 am
Call to Order
Opening Remarks

Roll Call, Housekeeping
Dr. Christopher Snell
Chair, CFSAC

Dr. Wanda Jones
Designated Federal Official

9:15 am
Welcome Statement from the Assistant Secretary for Health

New Members Statement on CFSAC Interests/Goals
Dr. Howard K. Koh

CFSAC New Members

10:00 am
Remarks from Dr. Elizabeth Unger
Dr. Elizabeth Unger

10:30 am
Blood Safety Update on XMRV
Dr. Jerry Holmberg

11:00 am
Review/Update of past CFSAC recommendations
Committee Members

12:30 pm
Subcommittee Lunch
Subcommittee Members

1:30 pm
Public Comment
(on CFSAC charter)
Public

2:00 pm
Review and Discussion of CFSAC Charter and ByLaws
Committee Members

4:00 pm
Adjourn

ICD-11 Alpha Draft scheduled to launch between 10 and 17 May

ICD-11 Alpha Draft scheduled to launch between 10 and 17 May

Post #42 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-GT

NOTE: The post below is superceded by Post # 46:

PVFS, ME, CFS: the ICD-11 Alpha Draft and iCAT Collaborative Authoring Platform

Shortlink Post #46: http://wp.me/pKrrB-KK

Note that until the ICD-11 Alpha Draft is released, it cannot be determined how far the various Topic Advisory Groups have progressed with proposals for revising ICD-10 classifications or with populating definitions and other content according to the ICD Content Model. Proposals for revision of classifications and textual content may differ from the examples on the Demo and Training iCAT platform as it appeared on the date this posting was compiled (accessed 06.05.10).

Also note that information in this report applies to the revision of ICD-10 towards ICD-11. Countries using a “Clinical Modification” of ICD, for example, Canada (ICD-10-CA), the USA (implementing ICD-10-CM, in October 2013), Australia (ICD-10 AM) and Germany (ICD-10-GM) should refer to their specific national modification of ICD.

Information on the launch of ICD-11 Alpha Draft

The revision of ICD-10 is overseen by a Revision Steering Group (RSG) and being undertaken by a number of Topic Advisory Groups (TAGs) via a collaborative authoring platform called the iCAT (Initial ICD-11 Collaborative Authoring Tool) using wiki-like software.

Topic Advisory Groups have responsibility for revision of the various chapters, formulating definitions and diagnostic criteria for the relevant categories and suggesting changes to the classification structure.

Since 2007, anyone has been able to submit proposals to the various Topic Advisory Groups for changes or additions to ICD-10 via the ICD Update and Revision Platform. This is not the iCAT, but an extranet where any registered user has been able to submit proposals backed up with citations.

You can register for access, here:
https://extranet.who.int/icdrevision/nr/login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2ficdrevision%2fdefault.aspx

The WHO has scheduled a press launch of the ICD-11 Alpha Draft and the iCAT electronic authoring platform between 10 – 17 May.

You can see how the iCAT operates in this series of ICD Revision YouTubes: http://wp.me/PKrrB-eV

Once launched, the iCAT will be viewable to anyone who registers for access. But there will be varying levels of editing authority which will initially be restricted to WHO Classification Experts, WHO Secretariat, ICD-11 Revision Steering Group, the Managing Editors and members of Topic Advisory Groups and working groups and the reviewers and expert advisers recruited by the TAG Managing Editors to assist with the reviewing of content.

There is also an iCAT User Group for which anyone can register for membership.

It is anticipated that the public will not be able to interact with the iCAT, for example, to add comment on proposals, until after the Beta Draft has been released for public review and consultation in 2011. But following the launch of the Alpha Draft, it should be possible, to monitor the progress and population of content.

I have requested clarification of whether the names of external reviewers recruited by TAG Managers will be identified within the iCAT and whether the public will be able to track reviewers’ input and comments as content proposals are progressed through the Alpha Drafting Workflow.

ICD Revision maintains a Google website here: https://sites.google.com/site/icd11revision/home

The site publishes agendas and minutes for ICD Revision meetings and also PowerPoint presentations and revision documents. Some of these documents are works in progress and revised versions are uploaded from time to time on this page and on the Face-to Face Meetings pages:
https://sites.google.com/site/icd11revision/home/face-to-face-meetings/icamp/documents
https://sites.google.com/site/icd11revision/home/face-to-face-meetings

There are links for several key documents in Footnotes [1].

The WHO publishes only ICD-10 Volume 1: The Tabular List and ICD-10 Volume 2: The Instruction Manual, online. Summaries of WHO meetings in 2007 and presentations in 2008, proposed that all three volumes of ICD-11 should be freely accessible via the internet. When ICD-11 is disseminated (2014+), all volumes, including Volume 3: The Alphabetical Index, will be electronically published and accessible online.

In ICD-10 Volume 1: The Tabular List, “Postviral fatigue syndrome” is classified in Chapter VI (6) Diseases of the nervous system under G93 Other disorders of brain, coded G93.3.

“Benign myalgic encephalomyeltis” is also coded at G93.3.

http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icd10online/?gg90.htm+g933
https://dxrevisionwatch.wordpress.com/icd-11-me-cfs/

In ICD-10, “Chronic fatigue syndrome” is listed in Volume 3: The Alphabetical Index, only, where it is indexed to G93.3.

To date, ICD Revision has been silent around the inclusion (or not) of “Chronic fatigue syndrome” in Volume 1: The Tabular List, in ICD-11.

Nor has ICD Revision published any intention that it proposes to revise the existing Index code for “Chronic fatigue syndrome” for ICD-11 or that “Chronic fatigue syndrome” should be placed in a chapter other than Chapter VI (6), to which it is currently indexed, if it were the case that ICD Revision is considering the inclusion of “Chronic fatigue syndrome” in Volume 1: The Tabular List.

My websites and reports make no assumptions about what proposals might be made by any of the Topic Advisory Groups for the potential inclusion of “Chronic fatigue syndrome” in Volume 1, in ICD-11. But since all three volumes of ICD-11 will be integrable, it is reasonable to anticipate that “Chronic fatigue syndrome” might be included in Volume 1 in this forthcoming edition. (See Footnote [2])

ICD-11 will drop the use of Roman numerals for chapter numbering, so we shall be monitoring, for example, the development of Chapter 5: Mental and behavioural disorders (TAGMH) and Chapter 6: Diseases of the nervous system (TAG Neurology).

The “Start-up List”

The starting point for the Alpha Draft is the “Start-Up List” of categories that has been drafted by WHO to initiate the editing process. This list includes current ICD-10 content, input from ICD national modifications, primary care versions and speciality adaptations, textual definitions imported from affiliate classification publications, proposals received to revise the existing ICD via the Update and Revision Platform and other channels.

During alpha drafting, detailed structured definitions will be added to these ICD categories according to a common template – the “Content Model”.

The “Content Model”

According to ICD Revision, the most important difference between ICD-10 and ICD-11 will be the “Content Model”.

The Content Model is designed to support detailed descriptions of the clinical characteristics of each category and clear relationships to other terminologies and classifications. It identifies the basic characteristics needed to define any ICD category through use of multiple parameters (eg Body Systems, Body Parts, Signs and Symptoms, Diagnostic Findings, Causal Agents, Mechanisms, Temporal Patterns, Severity, Functional Impact, Treatment interventions, Diagnostic Rules).

So there is the potential for considerably more content to be included for diseases, disorders and syndromes for any given entity in ICD-11 than currently appears in ICD-10.

There are examples of several disease entities populated in accordance with the Content Model on the ICD Revision website. The most recent version of the Content Model can be downloaded from this page:
https://sites.google.com/site/icd11revision/home/face-to-face-meetings/icamp2-2010/documents

or open the file here:

Word Document: Doc2b
Content Model Specifications and User Guide

http://tinyurl.com/ICD11ContentModelApril10

See also this paper:

“A Content Model for the ICD-11 Revision”
http://bmir.stanford.edu/file_asset/index.php/1522/BMIR-2010-1405.pdf

How advanced will the Alpha Draft be when it is launched?

According to this late 2009 document: http://tinyurl.com/SummaryiCAMPSept09

It was projected that

“Volume I of ICD-11 Alpha Draft will be published with full Morbidity Linearization ( like ICD-10 fourth edition ) including definitions for at least 80% of the categories. 20% of the entries should have content model parameters completed.

“Volume II of ICD-11 Alpha Draft will be published as a prototype with guidelines and rules to the use of the classification for mortality and morbidity use cases.

“Volume III Index: will be presented both a Digital Search Tool and possible paper version”

The most recent iCamp2 (2010) and Revision Steering Group Meetings took place on 19-23 April, in Geneva. The agenda is available here: http://tinyurl.com/AgendaiCAMP2April10

Revising ICD via the iCAT platform towards a publication comprising three integrable volumes capable of continuous revision in response to new scientific evidence is an ambitious and technically complex operation. ICD-11 is being authored collaboratively by Topic Advisory Group Managers, members and reviewers who are scattered all over the world and who are undertaking these roles in addition to their professional commitments. At present, 136 scientists from 36 countries and all WHO regions are contributing to the work.

The Minutes of the April RSG meeting are not yet available and it’s not clear how on target the Alpha Draft remains or whether the goals for May 2010 have had to be revised.

To view the iCAT Demo and training platform:

Go to the ICD-11 Revision site:

https://sites.google.com/site/icd11revision/home/

then to this page:

iCAT – Initial ICD-11 Collaborative Authoring Tool
https://sites.google.com/site/icd11revision/home/icat

and click on this link:

The demo and training iCAT platform: http://icatdemo.stanford.edu/

this will link to the server hosting the iCAT Demo and Training Platform where you can see how the iCAT will function. (Give it a little time to load.)

Once you are into the iCAT demo, you can poke about:

Click on the “ICD Content” Tab (second Tab on left)

Open the + next to ICD Categories, if the drop down list is not already displaying

Open the + next to 06 VI Diseases of the nervous system

Open the + next to G90-G99 Other disorders of the nervous system

Open the + next to G93 Other disorders of brain

Click on G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome

On the Right of your screen:

Click on the “Definition Tab” if it is not already selected

You should see the following:

ICD Code* G93.3

ICD Title Postviral fatigue syndrome

Definition (Text currently unpopulated)

*For a Glossary of Terms click on the ? next to the Field Titles which link to a general page setting out the terms and template for content population within ICD-11.

(URL for this Glossary page is: http://apps.who.int/classifications/apps/icd/icatfiles/iCAT_Glossary.html#definition  )

There are no Definitions populated in this demo for the entry for “Postviral fatigue syndrome”.

Note that until the actual ICD-11 Alpha Draft is released, it cannot be determined how far the various Topic Advisory Groups have progressed with populating content according to the ICD Content Model for the categories of interest to us.

Some “External definitions” have been entered into the demo.

Note these have been imported from other classification systems, either as part of the initial “Start-up List” used to kick start the revision process, or are being used as examples of a populated field.

Again, we need to wait until the draft comes out to see how many fields have been populated so far, their textual content, and the editing status of their content.

External definitions:

Three definitions are currently displaying. (These three definitions are collated on this site along with their sources):
http://www.fpnotebook.com/Rheum/Sx/ChrncFtgSyndrm.htm

iCAT field: External definitions:

A syndrome of unknown etiology. Chronic fatigue syndrome
(CFS) is a clinical diagnosis characterized by an unexplained
persistent or relapsing chronic fatigue that is of at least six
months duration, is not the result of ongoing exertion, is not
substantially alleviated by rest, and results in substantial reduction
of previous levels of occupational, educational, social
or personal activities. Common concurrent symptoms of at least
six months duration include impairment of memory or concentration,
diffuse pain, sore throat, tender lymph nodes,headaches of a new
type, pattern, or severity, and nonrestorative sleep.
The etiology of CFS may be viral or immunologic. Neurasthenia
and fibromyalgia may represent related disorders. Also known as
myalgic encephalomyeltis.

Ontology ID UMLS/NC12007_05
E

distinctive syndrome characterized by chronic fatigue, mild fever,
lymphadenopathy, headache, myalgia, arthralgia, depression, and
memory loss: candidate eitiological agents include Epstein-Barr and
other herpesviruses.

Ontology ID UMLS/CSP2006

A syndrome characterized by persistent or recurrent fatigue,
diffuse musculoskeletal pain, sleep disturbances, and subjective
cognitive impairment of 6 months duration or longer. Symptoms
are not caused by ongoing exertion; are not relieved by rest; and
result in a substantial reduction of previous levels of occupational,
educational, social or personal activities. Minor alterations of
immune, neuroendocrine, and automatic function may be
associated with this syndrome. There is also considerable
overlap between this condition and FIBROMYALGIA. (From Semin
Neurol 1998;18(2):237-42: Ann Intern Med 1994 Dec 15;121(12):
953-9)

Ontology ID UMLS/MSH2008_2
008_02_04

Very few Tabs have been populated in this demo version of the iCAT:

Terms

Synomyms: Not yet populated

Inclusions: Benign myalgic encephalomyeltis

Exclusions: Not yet populated

Clinical Description; Body System; Body Part not yet populated

Entire brain (body structure) Term ID 258335003
Brain structure (body structure) Term ID 12738006

Diagnostic Criteria; Causal Mechanism and Risk Factors not yet populated

Causal Mechanism Virus (organism) Term ID 49872002

Risk Factors; Genomic Linkages; Etiology Type; Causal Mechanism; Functional Impact; SNOMED References not yet populated etc.

Go back to the ICD Content Tab list and open the page for Chapter 5 (V) Mental and behavioural disorders.

Then open the + for F40-F48 Neurotic, stress-related and somatoform disorders

Then open “F45 Somatoform disorders”

where the existing categories in ICD-10 Chapter V: Somatoform disorders are listed.

Note they are listed as they currently appear in ICD-10, as set out in this Comparison Table and are not congruent with any current proposals by the DSM-5 Work Group for Somatic Symptoms Disorders for the proposed major restructuring of the “Somatoform Disorders” categories, as published in the DSM-5 draft
proposals
for diagostic criteria, on 10 February:

Comparison Table: https://dxrevisionwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/dsm-icd-equiv3.png

“Harmonization” and integration of ICD-11 with DSM-5

There is already a degree of correspondence between DSM-IV and Chapter V of ICD-10. For the next editions, the APA and the WHO have committed as far as  possible: “To facilitate the achievement of the highest possible extent of uniformity and harmonization between ICD-11 mental and behavioural disorders and DSM-V disorders and their diagnostic criteria” with the objective that “The WHO and APA should make all attempts to ensure that in their core versions, the category names, glossary descriptions and criteria are identical for ICD and DSM.”

It should be evident from the iCAT demo that there is the potential for considerably more content to be included in ICD-11 than there is in ICD-10 and that the progress of the population of content for the categories of interest to us is going to need continuous monitoring as the Topic Advisory Groups and their reviewers work towards the Beta Draft.

I shall update as more information on the launch of the alpha and iCAT becomes available over the next couple of weeks.

————————-

Footnotes:

[1] Key documents:

Content Model Specifications and User Guide (v April 10)
Identifies the basic properties needed to define any ICD concept (unit, entity or category) through the use of multiple parameters.
http://tinyurl.com/ICD11ContentModelApril10

ICD-11 Revision Project Plan – Draft 2.0 (v March 10)
Describes the ICD revision process as an overall project plan in terms of goals, key streams of work, activities, products, and key participants.
http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/ICDRevisionProjectPlan_March2010.pdf

Alpha Drafting Workflow (v 06.10.09)
Sets out lines of responsibility between the various contributors for the alpha drafting phase.
https://dxrevisionwatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/alpha-drafting-workflow-27-01-10.doc

Further documents eg Style Guide, ICD-11 Conventions:
https://sites.google.com/site/icd11revision/home/face-to-face-meetings/icamp/documents

[2] The Introduction to ICD-10 Volume 3: The Alphabetical Index lists several possible relationships between a term included in the Alphabetical Index and a term included in the Tabular List to which it is indexed:

“The terms included in the category of the Tabular List are not exhaustive; they serve as examples of the content of the category or as indicators of its extent and limits. The Index, on the other hand, is intended to include most of the diagnostic terms currently in use. Nevertheless, reference should always be made back to the Tabular List and its notes, as well as the guidelines provided in Volume 2, to ensure that the code given by the Index fits with the information provided by a particular record.

“Because of its exhaustive nature, the Index inevitably includes many imprecise and undesirable terms. Since these terms are still occasionally encountered on medical records, coders need an indication of their assignment in the classification, even if this is to a rubric for residual or ill-defined conditions. The presence of a term in this volume, therefore, should not be taken as implying approval of its usage.”

and, according to a February 2009 response from WHO HQ Classifications, Terminology and Standards Team, terms that are listed in the Index may be:

a synonym to the label (title) of a category of ICD;
a sub-entity to the disease in the title of a category;
or a “best coding guess”.

In indexing “Chronic fatigue syndrome” to G93.3, ICD-10 does not specify how it views the term in relation to “Postviral fatigue syndrome” or in relation to “Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis”. Nor does ICD-10 specify how it views the relationship between “Postviral fatigue syndrome” and “Benign  myalgic encephalomyelitis”.

Whittemore Peterson Institute submission to DSM-5 draft proposals

Whittemore Peterson Institute submission to DSM-5 draft proposals

Post #41 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-Gv

Submissions

Patient organisations, professionals and advocates submissions are being collated on this dedicated Dx Revision Watch page: http://wp.me/PKrrB-AQ

If you would like your submission added please get in touch via the Contact form

Open Whittemore Peterson Institute response here in PDF format: WPI DSM-5 statement

or here: http://www.wpinstitute.org/news/docs/DSM-5WPIaw2.pdf

April 16, 2010

DSM-5 Task Force
American Psychiatric Association
1000 Wilson Boulevard Suite 1825
Arlington, VA 22209

Members of the DSM-5 Task Force:

The Whittemore Peterson Institute would like to address the potential revision of the American Psychiatric Association’s (APA)’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM-5). The APA’s proposed changes would combine several existing somatic categories into one larger category, Complex Somatic Symptom Disorder, adding language that closely resembles the CDC’s criteria for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome with additional sickness related behaviors that are often evidenced by those who are ill with a disease when it is poorly understood and characterized symptomatically.

The following language has been proposed:

To meet criteria for CSSD, criteria A, B, and C are necessary.

A. Somatic symptoms:

Multiple somatic symptoms that are distressing or one severe symptom

B. Misattributions, excessive concern or preoccupation with symptoms and illness: At least two of the following are required to meet this criterion:

High level of health-related anxiety.

Normal bodily symptoms are viewed as threatening and harmful

A tendency to assume the worst about their health (Catastrophizing)

Belief in the medical seriousness of their symptoms despite evidence to the contrary.

Health concerns assume a central role in their lives

C. Chronicity: Although any one symptom may not be continuously present, the state of being symptomatic is chronic and persistent (at least six months).

Recent findings by researchers at the Whittemore Peterson Institute, the Cleveland Clinic and the National Cancer Institute have found a link between those who have been previously diagnosed with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, (ME/CFS) and a new human retrovirus, XMRV. Yet ME/CFS is currently diagnosed symptomatically and requires the patient experience 6 months of severe fatigue. This disease is chronic and often causes a great deal of anxiety for those who suffer from its debilitating symptoms. Therefore, an individual suffering from ME/CFS could be erroneously classified within the new DSM-5 category as a somatic disorder when in fact they clearly suffer from a chronic infectious disease process, evidenced by many physical abnormalities. (Low grade fever, sore throat, severe headache, cognitive dysfunction, and enlarged lymph nodes, and painful joints and muscles).

The new language also adds undue concern about one’s health as criteria for establishing the diagnosis of complex somatic disorder. This is an immeasurable description of behavior that suggests that if one is suffering from an unknown illness and expresses deep concern or seeks answers from multiple sources (a potentially perfectly natural response to such a circumstance) that one could then be classified as having a somatic disorder. Yet, newly recognized diseases require time to develop the appropriate conformational laboratory tests. During that period of time, does it not remain the responsibility of physicians to recognize the patient’s illness and reassure the patient that they will do all they can to alleviate their suffering?

A person who is afflicted with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome is often incapable of taking care of their own most basic needs. The swiftness with which one is incapacitated without relief often results in accompanying depression and anxiety. If this patient is advised not to believe their own symptoms of illness they may become further traumatized by the doctors whose sworn duty is to “first do no harm”.

The Whittemore Peterson Institute is deeply concerned that there will be future complex biological diseases of unknown origin, which could too easily be ignored as the result of the diagnosis of “complex somatic disorders”. This would result in serious consequences for those patients who continue to decline in health without appropriate medical interventions.

The term CSSD may also serve as a diagnosis to be used by physicians who currently lack the sophisticated diagnostic tools to describe a new and emerging illness, causing serious harm to those who are ill. Two such recent examples of diseases once categorized as somatic illnesses are multiple sclerosis which was originally called, “hysterical women’s disease” and gastrointestinal ulcers. Only after these diseases were pursued by those who believed in their physical causes with subsequent biological research, were medically effective treatments made available. Thus creating a somatic diagnosis, when there is in fact a physical illness, would relegate a population of patients to many more years of suffering, while basic biological research funding is denied.

For these reasons, the WPI requests that the APA thoughtfully examine the purpose and possible unintended consequences for the encompassing somatic category of illness, Complex Somatic Disorder, and emphatically requests that the DSM-5 task force reject CSSD, as a medical or psychiatric diagnosis.

Sincerely,

Annette Whittemore
Founder and CEO
Whittemore Peterson Institute
6600 North Wingfield Parkway
Sparks Nevada 89436
Phone: 775.348.2335

Fax: 775.348.2350
www.wpinstitute.org  

On the subject of the use of the word “somatic”, Angela Kennedy published this note, in June 2009:

I’ve noticed for some time that various people have been using the term ‘somatic’ as if it signified a ‘psychosomatic’ or ‘psychogenic’ condition.

This is incorrect. The OED definition of ‘somatic’ is “of or relating to the body, especially as distinct from the mind” (my italics). The word comes from the Greek ‘soma’ meaning ‘body’.

Even when proponents of ‘psychogenic’ explanations (it’s in your mind, you’re imagining it, misinterpreting it, faking it, caused it by your own beliefs etc. etc. etc.) use the term ‘somatic illness’ they actually do mean an illness of the body. They may then claim this somatic (or bodily illness) is caused by psychological dysfunction, but the word ‘somatic’ does not mean “illness caused by psychological dysfunction”. It merely means illness of a body, or a bodily illness.

It is important that this word is used correctly, especially when people write to the media, government, the medical establishment etc. Otherwise we are in danger of seeing apparent objections published, from advocates, to saying ME/CFS is a bodily illness, purely because someone has used the word ‘somatic’ incorrectly!

News release: APA Closes Public Comment Period for Draft Diagnostic Criteria for DSM-5

News release: APA Closes Public Comment Period for Draft Diagnostic Criteria for DSM-5

Post #40 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-Gl

News Release

http://tinyurl.com/DSM5reviewcloses

or open PDF here:  APA Closes Public Comment Period for DSM-5 Release No. 10-31

For Information Contact:

Eve Herold, 703-907-8640

press@psych.org  Release No. 10-31

Jaime Valora, 703-907-8562

jvalora@psych.org

EMBARGOED For Release Until: April 20, 2010, 12:01 AM EDT

APA Closes Public Comment Period for Draft Diagnostic Criteria for DSM-5

DSM-5 Work Groups to Review Comments

ARLINGTON, Va. (April 20, 2010) -The American Psychiatric Association received 6,400 comments on a draft of the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders during a 2½ month public comment period, which ends today.

“This period of public review and comment of diagnostic criteria is unprecedented in both the field of psychiatry and in medicine,” said Alan F. Schatzberg, M.D., president of the American Psychiatric Association. “It demonstrates the APA’s commitment to an inclusive and transparent process of development for DSM-5.”

The criteria have been available for comment since they were published online on Feb. 10. The draft criteria will continue to be available for review on the DSM-5 Web site, www.dsm5.org , and updates to the draft will be posted on an ongoing basis. The public will have another opportunity to comment on the criteria and any changes after the first round of field trials.

A number of clinicians, researchers and family and patient advocates participated in the public comment period, contributing more than 6,400 comments on various aspects of DSM-5.

All comments submitted via the Web site were assigned to a topic-specific expert from one of the thirteen DSM-5 work groups for review. In their review, work group members will note submissions that need additional consideration from the work group as a whole. Upon evaluation from the entire work group, draft criteria may be revised.

For example, the Eating Disorders Work Group has proposed additional revisions to criteria for Anorexia Nervosa and Bulimia Nervosa based on comments received.

“The goal of DSM-5 is to create an evidence-based manual that is useful to clinicians and represents the best science available,” said David J. Kupfer, M.D., DSM-5 Task Force chair.

“The comments we received provide the task force and work groups with additional information and perspectives, ensuring that we have fully considered the impact any changes would have on clinical practice and disorder prevalence, as well as other real-world implications of revised criteria.”

Most of the comments that were submitted were diagnosis-specific, while nearly one-fourth were general. Distribution of the comments varied across the 13 work groups.

The work groups with the largest number of submitted comments include:

. Neurodevelopmental Disorders Work Group (23% of comments)

. Anxiety Disorders Work Group (15% of comments)

. Psychosis Disorder Work Group (11% of comments)

. Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders (10% of comments)

Following a review of all submitted comments and possible revisions to the draft criteria, the APA will begin a series of field trials to test some of the proposed diagnostic criteria in clinical settings. The proposed criteria will continue to be reviewed and refined over the next two years.

Final publication of DSM-5 is planned for May 2013

[Ends]