Deutschlandfunk Radio: Wissenschaft Im Brennpunkt: Störungswahn? DSM-5 with Allen Frances

February 3, 2013 by

Deutschlandfunk Radio: Wissenschaft Im Brennpunkt: Störungswahn? (DSM-5) with Allen Frances, MD

Post #223 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2EH

Flash:
http://www.dradio.de/dlf/sendungen/wib/1990949

Mp3 (12MB):
http://ondemand-mp3.dradio.de/file/dradio/2013/02/03/dlf_20130203_1630_c745d088.mp3

Deutschlandfunk Radio

http://www.dradio.de/dlf/sendungen/wib/1990949/

27:21 mins

WISSENSCHAFT IM BRENNPUNKT (Science In Focus)
03.02.2013

Störungswahn? (Delusional disorder?)

Psychiater streiten um die Zukunft ihres Fachs (Psychiatrists argue about the future of their profession)

Von Martin Hubert with contributions from Allen Frances, MD, and others

In einigen Monaten erscheint das neue amerikanische Handbuch zur Diagnose psychiatrischer Krankheiten, das “DSM-5”. Aber schon heute erzeugt es heftigen Streit. Denn das “DSM-5” wird die Entwicklung der Psychiatrie auf Jahre hinaus wesentlich beeinflussen.

Kritiker meinen, dass es zu viel neue und überflüssige Störungsbilder enthalte. Außerdem definiere es Störungen oft so weich, dass auch Durchschnittsmenschen künftig zum psychiatrischen Fall würden. Die Verteidiger des Handbuchs kontern: Es habe in der Geschichte immer wieder neue Störungen gegeben, auf die die Psychiater zu reagieren hätten. Außerdem seien weiche Kriterien nötig, um Risikopatienten früh erkennen und therapieren zu können. Wann ist ein Patient wirklich gefährdet – und wann leiden die Psychiater selbst unter Störungswahn? Der Streit zeigt, in welche Richtung sich die Psychiatrie insgesamt entwickeln könnte.

Weiterführende Links:

Seiten des Deutschlandradios:

Links ins Netz:

Filed under Allen Frances, American Psychiatric Association (APA), Bereavement, Conflicts of interest, Criticism of DSM-V, DSM-5, DSM revision process, DSM-5, DSM-5 draft proposals, DSM-5 in the media, ICD-11 in the media Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

ICD-11 Beta draft and Bodily Distress Disorders; Per Fink and Bodily Distress Syndrome: Parts One and Two

February 3, 2013 by

ICD-11 Beta draft and Bodily Distress Disorders; Per Fink and Bodily Distress Syndrome Parts One and Two

Post #222 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2Dz

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. The current draft may differ to the information in this report.

Part One

On January 6, I posted a brief update on proposals for the revision of ICD-10’s Somatoform Disorders based on what can be seen in the public version of the ICD-11 Beta drafting platform and on a book chapter by Professor, Sir David Goldberg. [1]

Professor Goldberg chairs the working group for revision of the mental health chapter of ICD-1o-PHC, the abridged, primary care version of ICD-10.

For the revision of ICD-10’s Somatoform Disorders sections for ICD-11, a WHO Expert Working Group on Somatic Distress and Dissociative Disorders has been assembled.

Professor Francis Creed (also a member of the DSM-5 Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders Work Group) is a member of this WHO working group, which is chaired by Professor Oye Gureje.

An April 2011 announcement by Stony Brook Medical Center states that Dr Joan E. Broderick, PhD had been appointed to the WHO Expert Working Group on Somatic Distress and Dissociative Disorders and that the first meeting of the group (said to consist of 17 international behavioral health professionals) was expected to be held in June 2011, in Madrid.

WHO has not published a list of  members of this working group or any progress reports and the names and affiliations of the 14 other members are unknown, so I am unable to confirm whether Professor Per Fink is a member of the group, which reports to the International Advisory Group for the Revision of ICD-10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders.

ICD-11 and Bodily Distress Disorders

ICD-11 is currently scheduled for completion in 2015/16. When viewing the public version of the Beta drafting platform please bear in mind the ICD-11 Revision Caveats: that the Beta draft is a work in progress, updated daily, is incomplete, may contain errors and is subject to change; not all proposals may be approved by the ICD-11 Revision Steering Committee or WHO classification experts, or retained following analysis of ICD-11 and ICD-11-PHC field trials.

The Bodily Distress Disorders section of ICD-11 Beta draft Chapter 5 can be found here:

Foundation View: http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/f/en#/http%3a%2f%2fid.who.int%2ficd%2fentity%2f1472866636
Linearization View: http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en#/http%3a%2f%2fid.who.int%2ficd%2fentity%2f1472866636

As the ICD-11 Beta drafting platform stands at the time of compiling this report, the existing ICD-10 Somatoform Disorders are proposed to be subsumed under or replaced by Bodily Distress Disorders, and Psychological and behavioural factors associated with disorders or diseases classified elsewhere.

The following proposed ICD-11 categories are listed as child categories under parent term, Bodily Distress Disorders, and Psychological and behavioural factors associated with disorders or diseases classified elsewhere:

EC5 Mild bodily distress disorder
EC6 Moderate bodily distress disorder
EC7 Severe bodily distress disorder
EC8 Psychological and behavioural factors associated with disorders or diseases classified elsewhere

No Definition or any other Content Model parameters have been populated for the proposed categories EC5, EC6 and EC7, which are new entities to ICD. (EC8 is a legacy category from ICD-10.)

Note that the sorting codes assigned to categories are subject to frequent change as chapters are reorganized.

From the information currently displaying in the Beta draft, it is not possible to determine:

• how ICD-11 proposes to define Bodily Distress Disorders;

• what diagnostic criteria are being proposed;

• whether diagnostic criteria would be based on a requirement for excessive or disproportionate psychological and behavioral characteristics in response to distressing somatic symptoms, such as illness anxiety, symptom focusing, catastrophising, maladaptive coping strategies, avoidance behavior or misattribution; or based on somatic symptom counts, or specific symptom clusters, or number of bodily systems affected, or a combination of these;

• how the three Severity Specifiers: Mild, Moderate and Severe would be categorized;

• how the three Severities would be assessed for within primary and secondary care;

• whether ICD-11’s proposed Bodily Distress Disorder construct is intended to mirror or incorporate DSM-5’s Somatic Symptom Disorder (SSD) construct, in line with ICD-11/DSM-5 harmonization, or

• whether it is intended to mirror or incorporate Per Fink’s Bodily Distress Syndrome (BDS) construct, or to combine elements from both;

• whether the Bodily Distress Disorder construct is proposed only to be applied to patients with distressing ‘medically unexplained somatic symptoms’ (MUS), or the so-called ‘Functional somatic syndromes’ (FSS), if the patient is considered to also meet the BDD criteria, or

• whether it is proposed to be inclusive of patients with distressing somatic symptoms in the presence of diagnosed illness and general medical conditions, if the patient is considered to also meet the criteria;

• whether the Bodily Distress Disorder construct is proposed to be inclusive of parents or caregivers perceived as encouraging maintenance of sick role behavior or over-involved.

• whether the Bodily Distress Disorder construct is proposed to be inclusive of children;

• whether it is proposed that all or selected of the following: Neurasthenia and Fatigue syndrome (F48.0), Chronic fatigue syndrome (indexed to G93.3 in ICD-10; classified in ICD-11 Beta draft as an ICD Title term in Chapter 6: Diseases of the nervous system), IBS (K58), and Fibromyalgia (M79.7) should be reclassified under Bodily Distress Disorders;

• whether the Bodily Distress Disorder construct is proposed to subsume ICD-10’s Hypochondriacal disorder with somatic symptoms or incorporate this entity under Illness Anxiety Disorder for ICD-11.

(For ICD-11, ICD-10’s Hypochondriacal disorder [F45.2] is currently proposed to be renamed to Illness Anxiety Disorder and located underANXIETY AND FEAR-RELATED DISORDERS.)

 • what ICD-11 proposes to do with ICD-10’s Neurasthenia;

(ICD-10’s Chapter V Neurasthenia [F48.0] is no longer listed in the public version of the ICD-11 Beta draft. For ICD-11-PHC, the primary care version of ICD-11, the proposal is for the term Neurasthenia to be eliminated. Since terms used in ICD-11-PHC require corresponding terms in the main classification, the intention may be to eliminate Neurasthenia from the main version, or subsume under another term.) [2]

All that can be determined from the Beta draft is that these earlier ICD-11 Beta draft Somatoform Disorders categories appear proposed to be subsumed under or replaced with the new BDD categories, EC5, EC6 and EC7, set out above:

Somatization disorder [F45.0 in ICD-10]
Undifferentiated somatoform disorder [F45.1 in ICD-10]
Somatoform autonomic dysfunction [F45.3 in ICD-10]
Persistent somatoform pain disorder [F45.4 in ICD-10]
    > Persistent somatoform pain disorder
    > Chronic pain disorder with somatic and psychological factors [Not in ICD-10]
Other somatoform disorders [F45.8 in ICD-10]
Somatoform disorder, unspecified [F45.9 in ICD-10]

I have previously reported that for ICD-11-PHC, the proposal, last year, was for a new disorder section called Bodily distress disorders, under which would sit new category Bodily stress [sic] syndrome.

This category is proposed for the ICD-11 primary care version to include “milder somatic symptom disorders” as well as “DSM-5’s Complex somatic symptom disorder” and would replace “medically unexplained somatic symptoms.” [2]

In a future post (Part Three of this report), I shall be discussing emerging proposals for the ICD-11 construct, Bodily Distress Disorders, which may serve to fill in some of the gaps.

In the meantime, since it is unclear whether and to what extent the ICD-11 Bodily Distress Disorders category is proposed to mirror or incorporate the Bodily Distress Syndrome construct developed by Per Fink et al, Aarhus, Denmark, I am providing some material on Bodily Distress Syndrome in Part Two

Filed under Bodily Distress Disorders, Bodily distress syndrome, DSM-5 draft proposals, ICD revision process, ICD-10, ICD-11 Beta Draft, MUS, Somatic Symptom Disorder, Somatoform Disorders, WHO (World Health Organization) Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Brief update on DSM-5 ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’

January 30, 2013 by

Brief update on DSM-5 ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’

Post #221 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2Dd

As previously reported, all draft proposals for categories and criteria for DSM-5 were frozen on the DSM-5 Development website on June 15, 2012, immediately following the closure of the third and final stakeholder review and comment period.

Changes made to the draft after June 15, 2012 are embargoed and final disorder descriptions and criteria sets won’t be evident until DSM-5 is released, in May, this year, unless APA elects to release selected information.

The manual texts that expand on the various disorder sections and the categories that sit within them have not been made public at any stage in the development process. It is understood that for the ‘Somatic Symptom Disorders’ group, for example, the manual text that accompanies these new categories and criteria sets will run to five or six pages.

On November 15, 2012, APA removed the entire third draft from the DSM-5 Development website.

According to this APA Permissions, Licensing & Reprints page, because the most recently posted draft [the third draft that was released on May 2, 2012] has undergone revisions and is no longer current, the criteria texts have been removed from the website in order to avoid confusion or use of outdated categories and definitions. [1]

The page also states that although APA Board of Trustees approved all the proposed diagnoses [in December, 2012] there continue to be minor editorial and content changes as APA moves towards the final stages of the publication process.

Although the DSM-5 Development Timeline has “Final Revisions by the APA Task Force; Final Approval by APA Board of Trustees; Submission to American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc” scheduled for December 2012, according to my sources, the manual texts were now expected to be finalized for the publishers by end of January.

 

DSM-5 Table of Contents

As also previously reported, APA has created new pages for information and resources for DSM-5, where a number of new articles and documents are available to download. [2][3]

http://www.psychiatry.org/dsm5

Documents include a DSM-5 Table of Contents which lists the disorder sections and the category terms that sit within them.

The DSM-5 Table of Contents reveals that changes to the overall section name for  the ‘Somatic Symptom Disorders’ categories and to the category names that sit within this section have been made since closure of the third and final draft.

For the overall disorder section name, DSM-5 will now be using

‘Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders’

rather than

‘Somatic Symptom Disorders’ as per the first, second and third drafts.

For the third draft, the 6 disorders proposed to sit under this disorder section were:

Somatic Symptom Disorders (SSD)

J 00 Somatic Symptom Disorder
J 01 Illness Anxiety Disorder
J 02 Conversion Disorder (Functional Neurological Symptom Disorder)
J 03 Psychological Factors Affecting Medical Condition
J 04 Factitious Disorder
J 05 Somatic Symptom Disorder Not Elsewhere Classified

7 categories are now listed (on Page 3) of the DSM-5 Table of Contents as follows:

Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders

Somatic Symptom Disorder
Illness Anxiety Disorder
Conversion Disorder (Functional Neurological Symptom Disorder)
Psychological Factors Affecting Other Medical Conditions
Factitious Disorder
Other Specified Somatic Symptom and Related Disorder
Unspecified Somatic Symptom and Related Disorder

Other than these revisions to the SSD disorder section name and category names, there are no other texts disclosed within the DSM-5 Table of Contents. So whatever text is included for the latter two categories, ‘Other Specified Somatic Symptom and Related Disorder’ and ‘Unspecified Somatic Symptom and Related Disorder,’ isn’t known.

Whether any revisions have been made to the disorder descriptions and criteria for the five other disorders since the third draft proposals were posted is also unknown because of the embargo on disclosure of changes to categories and criteria beyond June 15, last year.

 

SSD Work Group asked to reconsider

In December, Allen Frances, MD, who had chaired the Task Force that had oversight of the development of DSM-IV, asked the SSD Work Group, key APA Board of Trustees members and Task Force Chairs to reconsider the proposals for specifically the ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder’ category. [4]

These representations were made in response to Dr Frances’ own considerable concerns, and those of lay and professional stakeholders, for the looseness of the SSD definition and criteria set, as it had stood at the third draft, and the absence of a body of robust evidence for the validity and safety of ‘SSD’ as a construct, and data on likely prevalence rates.

Dr Frances also proffered suggestions for revisions that he considered would tighten up the criteria and reduce the potential for misapplication.

The response on behalf of the work group was that although Dr Frances’ suggestions were discussed, the work group would not be revising their recommendations. [5]

It is not known whether the concerns raised by Dr Frances in December were discussed beyond the SSD Work Group with the DSM-5 Task Force or with the APA Board of Trustees, who are responsible for approving proposals and therefore accountable for the content of the forthcoming manual.

 

ICD-11 and DSM-5

In a January 18 article for Psychiatric News, organ of the APA, Mark Moran reports:

“Kupfer [DSM-5 Task Force Chair] said the classification of disorders is largely harmonized with the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Diseases (ICD) so that the DSM criteria sets are more parallel with the proposed ICD-11. In DSM-5 both the current ICD-9-CM and the future standard ICD-10-CM codes (scheduled for 2014) are attached to the relevant disorders in the classification.” [6]

As reported in my Dx Revision Watch post of January 6, at the time of writing, current proposals in the ICD-11 Beta draft have ICD-10’s ‘Somatoform Disorders’ replaced with ‘Bodily Distress Disorders, and Psychological and behavioural factors associated with disorders or diseases classified elsewhere,’ with three, as yet undefined, Severities of ‘Bodily Distress Disorder.’ [7]

It remains to be clarified whether ICD-11’s Beta draft proposals for three Severities of ‘Bodily Distress Disorder’ to replace six ICD-10 ‘Somatoform Disorders’ proposes to mirror Per Fink’s definition and criteria for ‘Bodily Distress Syndrome’ or are more closely aligned with DSM-5‘s ‘Somatic Symptom Disorder,’ in keeping with the APA and WHO’s joint commitment to strive, where possible, for harmonization between the category names, glossary descriptions and criteria across the two systems. [8]

(I shall be addressing this issue in a future post.)

I have previously reported that for ICD-11-PHC, the abridged, Primary Health Care version of ICD-11, the proposal, last year, was for a disorder section called ‘Bodily distress disorders,’ under which would sit ‘Bodily stress [sic] syndrome.’ [9]

According to Professor, Sir David Goldberg, this category is proposed for ICD-11 Primary Health Care version to include “milder somatic symptom disorders” as well as “DSM-5′s Complex somatic symptom disorder” and would replace “medically unexplained somatic symptoms.” These proposals are subject to rejection or modification following ICD-11 Field Trials. [10]

DSM-5 is scheduled for release at the APA’s 166th Annual Meeting (San Francisco, May 18-22).

 

References and related reports

1] American Psychiatric Publishing Permissions, Licensing & Reprints

2] New DSM-5 webpages

3] DSM-5 Table of Contents

4] Mislabeling Medical Illness As Mental Disorder: The Eleventh DSM-5 Mistake, Psychology Today, DSM5 in Distress, Allen Frances, MD, December 8, 2012

5] Bad News: DSM 5 Refuses to Correct Somatic Symptom Disorder, Psychology Today, DSM5 in Distress, Allen Frances, MD, January 16, 2012

6] Continuity and Changes Mark New Text of DSM-5, Psychiatric News, Volume 48, Number 2, January 18, 2013: pp. 1-6 

7] ICD-11 Beta Draft Public Version: Bodily Distress Disorders
http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd11/browse/l-m/en#/http%3a%2f%2fwho.int%2ficd%23F45

8] Fink P, Schröder A. One single diagnosis, bodily distress syndrome, succeeded to capture ten diagnostic categories of functional somatic syndromes and somatoform disorders. J Psychosom Res 2010;68:415-26
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20403500

9] 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 2012
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22843638

10] Goldberg DP. Comparison Between ICD and DSM Diagnostic Systems for Mental Disorders. In: Sorel E, (Ed.) 21st Century Global Mental Health. Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2012: 37-53 [Free PDF Sample Chapter 2]

11] Somatic Symptom Disorder could capture millions more under mental health diagnosis, Suzy Chapman for Dx Revision Watch, May 26, 2012

Filed under Allen Frances, American Psychiatric Association (APA), Bodily Distress Disorders, Bodily stress syndrome, Criticism of DSM-V, DSM-5, DSM-5, DSM-5 draft proposals, DSM-5 in the media, Somatic Symptom Disorder, Somatoform Disorders Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Summary: September 19 ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting

October 11, 2012 by

Summary: September 19 ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting

Post #205 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2vc  

The September meeting of the ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee, jointly chaired by CMS and CDC, took place on September 19, 2012.

For further information on this public process see the CDC website page:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/icd9cm_maintenance.htm

+++

Meeting Summary document

The meeting Summary document has now been published.  The audio is not yet available.

The Summary document can be downloaded here:

September 19, 2012

Summary (10 pages) [PDF – 59 KB]

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/icd9/2012_September_Summary.pdf

or opened in PDF format here:     Summary September 19 2012

+++

The Proposals and Agenda document can be downloaded here:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/icd9cm_maintenance.htm#meeting_materials

ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting

September 19, 2012

Proposals (74 pages) [PDF – 730 KB]

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/icd9/Topic_packet_for_September_19_2012.pdf

or opened in PDF format here:     Topic packet for September 19 2012

According to the Summary document, the deadline for receipt of public comments on proposals submitted at this meeting is November 16, 2012. If there is any change to this date, I will update.

Comments on proposals presented at the ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee meeting should be sent to the following email address: nchsicd9CM@cdc.gov. See Page One of the Summary document for important information on submission of public comment.

Extract, Summary document

Chronic fatigue syndrome

Andreas Kogelnik, MD, representing the Coalition 4 ME/CFS, was available via telephone to address questions and clinical concerns.

Lori Chapo-Kroger, representing the Coalition 4 ME/CFS, expressed that many nations, and the World Health Organization, put CFS at G93 in ICD-10, and that this would include everyone but the U.S.

Mary Dimmock, representing the Coalition 4 ME/CFS, questioned why the change must wait until after 2014 when they feel that this is an error in the classification right now (and has been since 2001).

Dr. Kogelnik indicated that the term myalgic encephalomyelitis is used in Europe while the U.S. continues to use the term chronic fatigue syndrome, and that the Coalition 4 ME/CFS considers these two conditions (CFS and ME) to be the same. That is why they want both terms included in the same code.

Nelly Leon-Chisen, AHA, noted support for a need for a code for chronic fatigue syndrome distinct from chronic fatigue, unspecified. She indicated also that with the cause being unknown it is better that the classification not be locked into placing CFS as a viral code. Also, if there is no consensus for ME and CFS being the same then it makes sense to keep them as two separate codes. If research later develops that says they are the same then the data can be aggregated together. However, if the research does not show this, then you don’t have them lumped into one code that does not allow you to separate out one from the other.

Sue Bowman, AHIMA, questioned counting all CFS as following a virus infection. She expressed a need for clinical consensus on this condition. Also, she stated that she did not see a rationale for an early change (before 2014).

+++

Note: Dx Revision Watch has no connection with the Coalition 4 ME/CFS or with the development of any proposals submitted by this organization. The views and opinions expressed in Coalition 4 ME/CFS submissions to ICD-9-CM  Coordination and Maintenance Committee meetings represent the views of the Coalition 4 ME/CFS and its representatives and not the views of Dx Revision Watch.

All enquiries about proposals submitted to CMS/CDC on behalf of the Coalition 4 ME/CFS should be addressed directly to the Coalition 4 ME/CFS.

Note also that the proposal from the Coalition 4 ME/CFS (Option 1) and the alternative proposal presented by CMS/CDC (Option 2) at the September meeting are set out in accordance with the requirements of the ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee for the submission of proposals. 

For Options 1 and Option 2 see post Proposals: September 19 ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting or Proposals document Topic packet for September 19 2012

+++

Related posts:

Proposals: September 19 ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting

Coding CFS in ICD-10-CM: CFSAC and the Coalition4ME/CFS initiative

Extracts: ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting Summary document (CFS coding)

Extracts: ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting September 14, 2011 (Coding of CFS in ICD-10-CM)

Filed under CFSAC meetings, Chronic fatigue syndrome, Clinical Modification, CMS, Coalition4ME/CFS, ICD-10, ICD-10-CM, ICD-10-PCS, Postviral fatigue syndrome, WHO (World Health Organization) Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Proposals: September 19 ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting

September 18, 2012 by

Proposals: September 19 ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting

Post #204 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2uL

The next meeting of the ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee, which is jointly chaired by CMS and CDC, takes place on September 19, 2012. 

There is a very full agenda for this meeting. The meeting materials Proposals document has now been published.

For further information on this public process see the CDC website page:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/icd9cm_maintenance.htm

+++

The Proposals and Agenda document can be downloaded here:

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/icd9cm_maintenance.htm#meeting_materials

ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting

September 19, 2012

Proposals (74 pgs) [PDF – 730 KB]

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/icd9/Topic_packet_for_September_19_2012.pdf

or opened in PDF format here:      Topic packet for September 19 2012

Note: I have no connection with the Coalition 4 ME/CFS or with the development of any proposals submitted by this organization. All enquiries about the proposal submitted to CMS/CDC on behalf of the Coalition 4 ME/CFS should be addressed directly to the Coalition 4 ME/CFS.

Note also that the proposal from the Coalition 4 ME/CFS and the alternative proposal from CMS/CDC are set out in accordance with the requirements of the ICD-9-CM C & M Committee for the submission of proposals.

+++

Coding of CFS in the forthcoming US specific ICD-10-CM

At the ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee’s September 14, 2011 meeting, a presentation had been made on behalf of the Coalition 4 ME/CFS in relation to the formal submission of a proposal.

The proposal requested that consideration be given to moving the classification of Chronic fatigue syndrome from its current proposed location within the ICD-10-CM R code chapter (Chapter 18: Symptoms and signs) to the G code chapter (Chapter 6: Diseases of the nervous system).

This would bring the chapter location of Chronic fatigue syndrome in ICD-10-CM in line with the international version of ICD-10, the Canadian ICD-10-CA and proposals for the forthcoming ICD-11.

No NCHS decision reached in response to the September 2011 proposals and the public comments received in respect of these proposals was conveyed following closure of the public comment period, last November.

However, further discussion of Chronic fatigue syndrome and two additional proposals are tabled on the agenda for discussion at the September 19, meeting, tomorrow.

I am appending the relevant extract from the Diagnosis Agenda and Proposals document which was published on the CDC  website overnight. An official audio and a Summary of the meeting should be available in due course on the CDC website. I will update with these when available.

+++

Extract Topic packet for September 19 2012 (Page 46)

[…]

Chronic fatigue syndrome

Andreas Kogelnik, M.D., Coalition 4 ME/CFS

Chronic fatigue syndrome

A proposal, submitted by the Coalition 4 ME/CFS, to modify codes for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) was presented and discussed at the September 2011 ICD Coordination and Maintenance Committee meeting. The National Center for Health Statistics also presented an alternative proposal, Option 2. There were many comments from the audience, and there was general support for the NCHS-proposed Option 2, moving CFS from Chapter 18, Symptoms, signs and abnormal clinical findings, not elsewhere classified, to Chapter 6, Diseases of the Nervous System but retaining separate codes for CFS and myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME). The rationale for retaining separate codes included agreement on the importance of being able to extract data on the two conditions separately or combine, as needed. It was also noted that term ME is not seen in medical record documentation. Written comments received on this issue were inconclusive. There was not agreement that the two conditions are the same. While some comments were from private citizens, others were from advocacy organizations and associations that represent health care providers and other large constituencies that use the classification. The public comment period following the meeting is not meant as a poll or survey. Analysis of public comment focused on the substance of the comments; whether there was a clear scientific consensus regarding the etiology and manifestations of the condition; and an understanding of the classification, its structure and conventions, and its uses by the health care industry.

As noted in the information from the September 2011 presentation, the cause or causes of CFS remain unknown, despite a vigorous search. While a single cause for CFS may yet be identified, another possibility is that CFS represents a spectrum of illnesses resulting from multiple possible pathways. Conditions that have been proposed to trigger the development of CFS include infections, trauma, immune dysfunction, stress, and exposure to toxins. Research in this area is ongoing.

There are several case definitions currently in use, some separating CFS from ME, and others merging the two conditions. The most widely used are the 1994 case definition (http://www.cdc.gov/cfs/case-definition/index.html ), the Canadian and the Oxford definitions. A new case definition for ME was published in the 2011 international consensus criteria that emphasized recent research and clinical experience that strongly point to widespread inflammation and multisystem symptoms and neuropathology. This new definition, which considers ME and CFS as synonymous terms, however, has not been widely vetted by the health care community at large. While there is no consensus on one case definition, there is consensus that this is a serious and complex syndrome, and it is likely that there are multiple subgroups. It has been noted that some providers use the terms interchangeably while others consider one condition a subgroup of the other. There is also some overlap with fibromyalgia and CFS/ME could be considered one of the multiple chronic overlapping pain conditions.

References

1. Fukuda et al. Ann Intern Med (1994) 121:953-959
(http://www.cdc.gov/cfs/case-definition/1994.html )
2. Holmes et al. Ann Intern Med (1988) 108:387-389.
3. Sharpe et al. J Roy Soc Med (1991) 84:118-121
4. Carruthers et al. J CFS (2003) 11:7-97
5. Carruthers et al.. J Intern Med (2011) 270: 327-38.

The Coalition 4 ME/CFS has stated that they do not support Option 2 proposed in September 2011 and have submitted a revised proposal. A revised Option 2 is also being proposed, consistent with comments received supporting Option 2 as noted above. The Coalition is also requesting that their proposal be considered for implementation prior to October 1, 2014 even though the condition is not a new disease and therefore does not meet the criteria for implementation during the partial freeze.

Based on the above, the following proposals for consideration are:

+++

+++
For comparison, the proposal that had been presented by CDC at the September 2011 meeting in counterpoint to an earlier proposal presented by the Coalition 4 ME/CFS at that same meeting was this:

 

 

• Instead of Title term G93.3 Postviral and other chronic fatigue syndromes (CDC Option 2, September 2011)

CDC suggests retaining the Title term G93.3 Postviral fatigue syndrome (CDC Option 2, September 2012).

+++
• Instead of Child category G93.31 Postviral fatigue syndrome, Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis

CDC is now suggesting two categories for Postviral fatigue syndrome, thus:

G93.30 Postviral fatigue syndrome, unspecified, Postviral fatigue syndrome NOS (not otherwise specified)

with a discrete Child category G93.31 Myalgic encephalomyelitis, Benign myalgic encephalomyelitis.

+++
• No suggested change to the September 2011 CDC Option 2 suggestion for Child categories:

G93.32 Chronic fatigue syndrome, Chronic fatigue syndrome NOS.

The+++

Related posts:

Coding CFS in ICD-10-CM: CFSAC and the Coalition4ME/CFS initiative

Extracts: ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting Summary document (CFS coding)

Extracts: ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting September 14, 2011 (Coding of CFS in ICD-10-CM)

Filed under CFSAC meetings, Chronic fatigue syndrome, Clinical Modification, CMS, Coalition4ME/CFS, ICD-10, ICD-10-CM, ICD-10-PCS, Postviral fatigue syndrome, WHO (World Health Organization) Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Notice of Meeting of the ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee

August 16, 2012 by

Notice of Meeting of the ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee

Post #201 Shortlink: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2tv

Update at August 18:

CMS meeting to address more ICD-10 issues  Round up from Carl Natale for ICD10 Watch

September ICD-9-CM C & M meeting announced

The next meeting of the ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee has been announced for September 19, 2012 and a tentative agenda published.

For further information on this public process see the CDC website page:

The 2013 release of ICD-10-CM is available to download from the CDC site: International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM)

ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee

Upcoming meeting: September 19, 2012

    Tentative Agenda

Html: Federal Register Notice of Meeting of ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee

A Notice by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Notice of Meeting of the ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee

The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Classifications and Public Health Data Standards Staff announces the following meeting:

Name: ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance (C&M) Committee meeting.

Time and Date: 9 a.m.-5 p.m., September 19, 2012.

Place: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Auditorium, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244.

Status: Open to the public, limited only by the space available. The meeting room accommodates approximately 240 people.

Security Considerations: Due to increased security requirements CMS has instituted stringent procedures for entrance into the building by non-government employees. Attendees will need to present valid government-issued picture identification, and sign-in at the security desk upon entering the building. Attendees who wish to attend a specific ICD-9-CM C&M meeting on September 19, 2012, must submit their name and organization by September 10, 2012, for inclusion on the visitor list. This visitor list will be maintained at the front desk of the CMS building and used by the guards to admit visitors to the meeting.

Participants who attended previous ICD-9-CM C&M meetings will no longer be automatically added to the visitor list. You must request inclusion of your name prior to each meeting you attend.

Please register to attend the meeting on-line at: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/apps/events/.Show citation box

Please contact Mady Hue (410-786-4510 or Marilu.hue@cms.hhs.gov ), for questions about the registration process.

Matters To Be Discussed: Tentative agenda items include: September 19, 2012.

ICD-10 Topics:
ICD-10 Implementation Announcements
Expansion of Thoracic Aorta Body Part Under Heart and Great Vessels System
Addendum Issues (Temporary Therapeutic Endovascular Occlusion of Vessel, changing body part from thoracic aorta to abdominal aorta)
ICD-10MS-DRGs
ICD-10HAC Translations
ICD-10MCE Translations

ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Topics:
Age related macular degeneration
Bilateral mononeuropathy
Bilateral option for cerebrovascular codes
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
Complications of urinary devices
Diabetic macular edema
Food Protein Induced Enterocolitis Syndrome (FPIES)
Maternal care for previous Cesarean section/previous uterine incision
Metatarsus varus (congenital metatarsus adductus)
Microscopic colitis
Mid-cervical region and coding of spinal cord injuries
Multifocal motor neuropathy
Parity to supervision of pregnancy codes
Proliferative diabetic retinopathy
Retinal vascular occlusions
Salter Harris fractures
Sesamoiditis
Shin splints
Spontaneous rupture/disruption of tendon

Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.

Note:

CMS and NCHS will no longer provide paper copies of handouts for the meeting. Electronic copies of all meeting materials will be posted on the CMS and NCHS Web sites prior to the meeting at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/ICD9ProviderDiagnosticCodes/03_meetings.asp#  and http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/icd/icd9cm_maintenance.htm

Contact Persons for Additional Information: Donna Pickett, Medical Systems Administrator, Classifications and Public Health Data Standards Staff, NCHS, 3311 Toledo Road, Room 2337, Hyattsville, Maryland 20782, email dfp4@cdc.gov :, telephone 301-458-4434 (diagnosis); Mady Hue, Health Insurance Specialist, Division of Acute Care, CMS, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244, email marilu.hue@cms.hhs.gov , telephone 410-786-4510 (procedures).

The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign Federal Register notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Dated: August 9, 2012.

Catherine Ramadei,

Acting Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. 2012-20019 Filed 8-14-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-18-P

(c) 2012 US Federal Register

+++
Related posts:

At the ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee’s September 14, 2011 meeting, a presentation was made on behalf of the Coalition 4 ME/CFS in relation to the formal submission of a proposal that consideration be given to moving the classification of Chronic fatigue syndrome from its current proposed location within the ICD-10-CM R code chapter (Chapter 18: Symptoms and signs) to the G code chapter (Chapter 6: Diseases of the nervous system).

This would bring chapter location and parent class coding of Chronic fatigue syndrome in line with the international version of ICD-10, published in 1990, the Canadian ICD-10-CA and proposals for the forthcoming ICD-11.

No decision in response to the proposal, meeting discussions and public comment received has been conveyed following closure of the public comment period. Further discussion of Chronic fatigue syndrome has been tabled on the tentative agenda for the September 19, 2012 meeting.

I will post Summary documents and other relevant meeting materials as these become available. There are three posts on Dx Revision Watch that relate to and report on the presentation at the September 14, 2011 meeting:

Coding CFS in ICD-10-CM: CFSAC and the Coalition4ME/CFS initiative

Extracts: ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting Summary document (CFS coding)

Extracts: ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee Meeting September 14, 2011 (Coding of CFS in ICD-10-CM)

Filed under CFSAC meetings, Chronic fatigue syndrome, Clinical Modification, CMS, Coalition4ME/CFS, ICD-10, ICD-10-CM, ICD-10-PCS, Postviral fatigue syndrome, WHO (World Health Organization) Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →