Much of the lack of resistance to the switch to ICD-10-CM is based on the presumption that since it is the next "version", it simply must be better. Proponents deride the arguments against the switch as being analogous to the question "MS-DOS works fine, why Windows?"
However, a better operating-system analogy would be "Windows 98 works fine, why Windows ME?"
As those who upgraded to Windows ME can attest, the upgrade was a complete disaster. PC World rated Windows ME as the fourth worst tech product of all time.
Analogously, ICD-10-CM is the last upgrade for the archaic, "statistical classification" architecture of terminologies. ICD-11 will use modern approaches to terminology.
In this sense ICD-10-CM is very much like Windows ME, in that Windows ME was the last MS-DOS based Microsoft OS before Microsoft converted its home OS to the newer, Windows NT architecture.
How ironic.
As naysayers against ICD-10-CM, we are saying that we should skip ICD-10-CM, which is the Windows ME of disease classification. It is the proponents of ICD-10-CM who are arguing for the perpetuation of ancient technology, not the naysayers.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment