Premium Reports
ICD-10 Preparation

ICD-10 Preparation
Which Firm Has the Most Implementation Expertise?

Authored by: | Read Time: 2 minutes

Clinical documentation improvement (CDI) software and services, computer assisted coding (CAC), dual coding, and expertise provided by ICD-10 implementation firms are pillars in many providers’ ICD-10 preparation road maps. This report highlights which vendors/firms are helping providers achieve the greatest success in each area.

1. PWC, NUANCE AND NAVIGANT SET THEMSELVES APART IN CDI

PwC’s strong client leadership engagement and expert on-site physician trainers produce the highest client improvements in CMI and financial outcomes of any rated firm KLAS measures. And PwC clients report that the strong engagement and capable resources are crucial in achieving physician buy-in to the CDI program.

Nuance and Navigant set themselves apart with providers through responsive support and continual optimization and engagement—which are some of the top determinants of the success and sustainability of provider CDI programs.

2. CAC NOT EQUAL TO CODER PRODUCTIVITY YET

3M and Optum hold a significant lead in mindshare and market share, but customer support challenges and unmet productivity expectations have opened the door for newer entrants Dolbey, Nuance, and Precyse.Although most providers interviewed haven’t hit their productivity expectations, organizations who have successful CAC implementations and experience high code-suggestion accuracy report achieving productivity gains of 20%–40% in both hospital-based and ambulatory care settings.

KLAS Reports 2015: ICD-10 

3. 3M, OPTUM DUAL CODING: EARLY INSIGHTS

The successful execution of dual coding is the top factor determining high ICD-10 preparedness for providers interviewed for KLAS’ 2014 CDI services report. Twenty organizations KLAS spoke with made comments about their dual coding experiences in 2014. Several 3M and Optum clients indicated they are dual coding, and their experiences yielded the following early insights.

4. ICD-10 IMPLEMENTATION EXPERTISE VARIES WIDELY AMONG FIRMS

The following is a summary of the ICD-10 implementation work being performed by firms, including project leadership, system remediation, specialized training, coding and revenue cycle workflow expertise, and testing. 

PwC: Large implementation and PM projects, some with payer testing and CDI. Consistently strong on-site resources, organization-wide guidance, and nimble problem solving.​

Optum: Provides project management, training, technical experts, and CDI. Some clients receive seasoned resources, strong communication; others want more direction, leadership from PMs and executives.

Cerner [C]: System remediation and coding, application, physician experts. Some clients report flexibility and strong, broad pool of resources; others struggle with communication and executive level engagement.

Accenture*: 2014 ICD-10 Consulting Best in KLAS category leader. Highlighted for industry knowledge, leadership, and reputation.

Deloitte Consulting*: Very large projects, enterprise-focused, and some CDI. Creative problem resolution, and expert resources in coding, revenue process, and workflow.

Hayes Management Consulting*: Deep ICD-10 knowledge. Consistent communication, best practice sharing, and partnership. Lack of proactive reach-out issue for some.

Leidos Health*: Primarily project-management resources. Mixed client reports on meeting expected ROI and on expertise and capability of consultants.

Want to see full details?

 Download Report Brief  Download Full Report

This material is copyrighted. Any organization gaining unauthorized access to this report will be liable to compensate KLAS for the full retail price. Please see the KLAS DATA USE POLICY for information regarding use of this report. © 2018 KLAS Enterprises, LLC. All Rights Reserved. NOTE: Performance scores may change significantly when including newly interviewed provider organizations, especially when added to a smaller sample size like in emerging markets with a small number of live clients. The findings presented are not meant to be conclusive data for an entire client base.