Tag Archives: who drug reference list

ICD Billable Gov’t Execution Medical Codes

ICD Codes
In the U.S., “intervention” is a Civil Law procedure where someone not currently part of a case can join
the case to make sure their interests get fairly represented.

2020 ICD-10-CM External Causes Index
‘B’ Terms
Index Terms Starting With ‘B’ (Beheading)
Index Terms Starting With ‘B’ (Beheading)
Beheading (by guillotine)
 homicide X99.9
 legal execution – see Legal, intervention
 Y35.93XA is a billable/specific ICD-10-CM code that can be used to indicate a diagnosis for
reimbursement purposes.
 Short description: Legal intervention, means unsp, suspect injured, init encntr
 The 2020 edition of ICD-10-CM Y35.93XA became effective on October 1, 2019.
ICD-10-CM Codes
V00-Y99 Legal intervention, operations of war, military operations, and terrorism
Legal intervention, operations of war, military operations, and terrorism Y35-Y38
Legal intervention, operations of war, military operations, and terrorism Y35-Y38
Codes
Y35
Legal intervention
Y36
Operations of war
Y37
Military operations
Y38
Terrorism
Euthanizing with poison only takes 2 doctors in agreement.
Home > 2013 ICD-9-CM Diagnosis Codes > Supplementary Classification Of External Causes Of Injury And
Poisoning E000-E999 > Legal Intervention E970-E979 > Legal execution E978-
2013 ICD-9-CM Diagnosis Code E978
Legal execution
 ICD-9-CM E978 is a billable medical code that can be used to indicate a diagnosis on a
reimbursement claim, however, E978 should only be used for claims with a date of service on or
before September 30, 2015. For claims with a date of service on or after October 1, 2015, use an
equivalent ICD-10-CM code (or codes).
 E978 describes the circumstance causing an injury, not the nature of the injury.
 You are viewing the 2013 version of ICD-9-CM E978.
 More recent version(s) of ICD-9-CM E978: 2014 2015.
 No ICD-10-CM code(s) convert to ICD-9-CM E978
Applies To
 All executions performed at the behest of the judiciary or ruling authority [whether permanent
or temporary] as:
 asphyxiation by gas
 beheading, decapitation (by guillotine)
 capital punishment
 electrocution
 hanging
 poisoning
 shooting
 other specified means
Y37.45 Military operations involving combat using blunt or piercing object
 Y37.46 Military operations involving intentional restriction of air and airway
 Y37.6X1 Military operations involving biological weapons, civilian
 Y36.211 War operations involving explosion of aerial bomb, civilian
 Y36.3 War operations involving fires, conflagrations and hot substances
 Y36.32 War operations involving incendiary bullet
Index Terms Starting With ‘L’ (Legal)
Legal
 execution (any method) – see Legal, intervention
 intervention (by)
 baton – see Legal, intervention, blunt object, baton
 bayonet – see Legal, intervention, sharp object, bayonet
 blow – see Legal, intervention, manhandling
 blunt object
 baton
o injuring
 bystander Y35.312
 law enforcement personnel Y35.311
 suspect Y35.313
unspecified person Y35.319
 injuring
o bystander Y35.302
o law enforcement personnel Y35.301
o suspect Y35.303
o unspecified person Y35.309
 specified NEC
o injuring
 bystander Y35.392
 law enforcement personnel Y35.391
 suspect Y35.393
 unspecified person Y35.399
 stave
o injuring
 bystander Y35.392
 law enforcement personnel Y35.391
 suspect Y35.393
 unspecified person Y35.399
 bomb – see Legal, intervention, explosive
 conducted energy device
 injuring
o bystander Y35.832
o law enforcement personnel Y35.831
o suspect Y35.833
o unspecified person Y35.839
 cutting or piercing instrument – see Legal, intervention, sharp object
 dynamite – see Legal, intervention, explosive, dynamite
 electroshock device (taser)
 injuring
o bystander Y35.832
o law enforcement personnel Y35.831
o suspect Y35.833
o unspecified person Y35.839
 explosive(s)
 dynamite
o injuring
 bystander Y35.112
 law enforcement personnel Y35.111
 suspect Y35.113
 unspecified person Y35.119
 grenade
o injuring
 bystander Y35.192
 law enforcement personnel Y35.191
 suspect Y35.193
 unspecified person Y35.199
 injuring
o bystander Y35.102
o law enforcement personnel Y35.101
o suspect Y35.103
o unspecified person Y35.109
 mortar bomb
o injuring
 bystander Y35.192
 law enforcement personnel Y35.191
 suspect Y35.193
 unspecified person Y35.199
 shell
o injuring
 bystander Y35.122
 law enforcement personnel Y35.121
 suspect Y35.123
 unspecified person Y35.129
 specified NEC
o injuring
 bystander Y35.192
 law enforcement personnel Y35.191
 suspect Y35.193
 unspecified person Y35.199
 firearm(s) (discharge)
 handgun
o injuring
 bystander Y35.022
 law enforcement personnel Y35.021
 suspect Y35.023
 unspecified person Y35.029
 injuring
o bystander Y35.002
o law enforcement personnel Y35.001
o suspect Y35.003
o unspecified person Y35.009
 machine gun
o injuring
 bystander Y35.012
 law enforcement personnel Y35.011
 suspect Y35.013
 unspecified person Y35.019
 rifle pellet
o injuring
 bystander Y35.032
 law enforcement personnel Y35.031
 suspect Y35.033
 unspecified person Y35.039
 rubber bullet
o injuring
 bystander Y35.042
 law enforcement personnel Y35.041
 suspect Y35.043
 unspecified person Y35.049
 shotgun – see Legal, intervention, firearm, specified NEC
 specified NEC
o injuring
 bystander Y35.092
 law enforcement personnel Y35.091
 suspect Y35.093
 unspecified person Y35.099
 gas (asphyxiation) (poisoning)
 injuring
o bystander Y35.202
o law enforcement personnel Y35.201
o suspect Y35.203
o unspecified person Y35.209
 specified NEC
o injuring
 bystander Y35.292
 law enforcement personnel Y35.291
 suspect Y35.293
 unspecified person Y35.299
 tear gas
o injuring
 bystander Y35.212
 law enforcement personnel Y35.211
 suspect Y35.213
 unspecified person Y35.219
 grenade – see Legal, intervention, explosive, grenade
 injuring
 bystander Y35.92
 law enforcement personnel Y35.91
 suspect Y35.93
 unspecified person Y35.99
 late effect Y35
 (of) – see with 7th character S
 manhandling
 injuring
o bystander Y35.812
o law enforcement personnel Y35.811
o suspect Y35.813
o unspecified person Y35.819
 sequelae Y35
 (of) – see with 7th character S
 sharp objects
 bayonet
o injuring
 bystander Y35.412
 law enforcement personnel Y35.411
 suspect Y35.413
 unspecified person Y35.419
 injuring
o bystander Y35.402
o law enforcement personnel Y35.401
o suspect Y35.403
o unspecified person Y35.409
 specified NEC
o injuring
 bystander Y35.492
 law enforcement personnel Y35.491
 suspect Y35.493
 unspecified person Y35.499
 specified means NEC
 injuring
o bystander Y35.892
o law enforcement personnel Y35.891
o suspect Y35.893
 stabbing – see Legal, intervention, sharp object
 stave – see Legal, intervention, blunt object, stave
 stun gun
 injuring
o bystander Y35.832
o law enforcement personnel Y35.831
o suspect Y35.833
o unspecified person Y35.839
 taser
 injuring
o bystander Y35.832
o law enforcement personnel Y35.831
o suspect Y35.833
o unspecified person Y35.839
 tear gas – see Legal, intervention, gas, tear gas
 truncheon – see Legal, intervention, blunt object, stave
ICD-10 is the 10th revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health
Problems (ICD), a medical classification list by the World Health Organization (WHO). It contains codes
for diseases, signs and symptoms, abnormal findings, complaints, social circumstances, and external
causes of injury or diseases.[1] Work on ICD-10 began in 1983,[2] became endorsed by the Forty-third
World Health Assembly in 1990, and was first used by member states in 1994.[1] It remains current until
January 1, 2022, when it will be replaced by ICD-11.
[3]
While WHO manages and publishes the base version of the ICD, several member states have modified it
to better suit their needs. In the base classification, the code set allows for more than 14,000 different
codes[4] and permits the tracking of many new diagnoses compared to the preceding ICD-9. Through the
use of optional sub-classifications ICD-10 allows for specificity regarding the cause, manifestation,
location, severity and type of injury or disease.[5] The adapted versions may differ in a number of ways,
and some national editions have expanded the code set even further; with some going so far as to add
procedure codes. ICD-10-CM, for example, has over 70,000 codes.[6]
Because the medical coding field is expanding so rapidly at the moment, it may seem like it’s a relatively
new occupation… but this certainly isn’t the case!
Medical billing and coding have been around for decades. And just like fifty years ago, it continues to be
an ever-changing field.
Believe it or not, the ICD-9 diagnosis coding system originated in 17th century England.
Statistical data was gathered through a system known as the London Bills of Mortality and arranged into
numerical codes. These codes were used to measure the most frequent causes of death.
Fast-forward a few hundred years…
By 1937, this statistical analysis of the causes of death was organized into the International List of
Causes of Death. Over the years, the World Health Organization (WHO) used this list more and more to
assist in tracking mortality rates and international health trends.
The list was later developed into the International Classification of Diseases, which is now in its 10th
edition, also known as the ICD-10-CM/PCS.
In 1977, the worldwide medical community recognized the ICD system, which then prompted the
National Centers for Health Statistics (NCHS) to expand the study to include clinical information.
In other words, in 1977, the ICD system was expanded to not only include causes of death, but also
clinical diagnoses such as illnesses and injuries.
Adding clinical diagnoses provided additional statistical information on basic healthcare. Now there was
a way to index medical records, make medical reviews easier to complete, and provide further
opportunities for medical care.
The ICD-10 version is much more specific than previous editions, for example, in ICD-9 there were only
13,000 codes and the “other” and “non-specified” codes were used for numerous diseases, conditions,
and injuries. The ICD-10 has 68,000 codes, which eliminate a lot of the “other” and “non-specified”
codes which help greatly with the reimbursement process.There will be a lot fewer denied claims and
physicians and healthcare providers will be paid for specific services instead of generic cases.
There were numerous changes made between ICD-9 and ICD-10. Aside from the number of codes and
the elimination of most of the “other” and the “non-specified” codes and the inclusion of combination
codes for symptoms and diagnoses, fewer codes are needed to report and fully describe a patient’s
condition. The code set has been expanded from five positions (first one alphanumeric, others numeric)
to seven positions. The codes use alphanumeric characters in all positions, not just the first position as in
ICD-9. When using a modifier, the codes expand to 6 or 7 positions.
So,why the Change from ICD-9 to ICD-10? The question on a lot of physicians, coders, and healthcare
information specialists minds was why the change? Many of these people believed the change would
only confuse everyone and make things worse; if it is not broken why fix it? What they didn’t realize is
that the “system” was not only broken but dated and in need of upgrading. If hospitals, healthcare
facilities, and private practice physicians were going to “stay in business” these changes were necessary
and long overdue.
As medicine becomes more reliant on technology and web-based medical records, more changes are
sure to take place involving medical billing and coding guidelines and the preservation and
confidentiality of medical records. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention have already approved adding 3,651 ICD-10 hospital inpatient
procedure codes and about 1,900 ICD-10 diagnosis codes for the fiscal year 2017. Implementation of the
new codes will begin in October 2016.
Medical Coding is making history right now and the future of health care looks promising.
For more information concerning the history of medical coding: mb-guide.org/history-of-medicalcoding.html
The three most common code sets now used (ICD-9 codes, CPT medical billing codes, and HCPCS Level II
codes) haven’t always existed and been used together.
The medical industry is always being updated. Knowing how medical codes were developed and what
they’re used for will help you understand the ways that they might change in the future.
ICD-9 Codes: Diagnoses
Believe it or not, the ICD-9 diagnosis coding system originated in 17th century England.
Statistical data was gathered through a system known as the London Bills of Mortality, and arranged
into numerical codes. These codes were used to measure the most frequent causes of death.
Fast-forward a few hundred years…
By 1937, this statistical analysis of the causes of death was organized into the International List of
Causes of Death. Over the years, the World Health Organization (WHO) used this list more and more to
assist in tracking mortality rates and international health trends.
The list was later developed into the International Classification of Diseases, which is now in its ninth
revision (ICD-9).
In 1977, the worldwide medical community recognized the ICD system, which then prompted the
National Centers for Health Statistics (NCHS) to expand the study to include clinical information.
In other words, in 1977, the ICD system was expanded to not only include causes of death, but also
clinical diagnoses such as illnesses and injuries.
Adding clinical diagnoses provided additional statistical information on basic healthcare. Now there
was a way to index medical records, make medical reviews easier to complete, and provide further
opportunities for medical care.
But the history of medical coding isn’t over yet…
ICD-10: Upcoming Changes
Due to the ever-changing nature of medicine and healthcare, the WHO updated the ICD-9 system to the
ICD-10 system when they published the 10th revision in 1994.
This new system accommodates advances in medical knowledge of diseases and their processes, as well
as providing additional information on patient diagnoses.
Click for much more information on ICD-10 codes.
CPT: Procedure Coding
The Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) coding manual provides descriptions of healthcare services.
Unlike diagnosis codes, which have been maintained in one way or another for the last three hundred
years, procedure coding practices are much newer.
CPT is technically part of the Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System, and is otherwise known as
HCPCS Level I. This entire system is copyrighted and maintained by the American Medical Association
(AMA).
In 1983, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) adopted the CPT system and mandated
that the code sets in the manual be used for all Medicare and Medicaid coding.
Because of CMS’s influence on the commercial insurance companies, as well as individual and facility
providers, the CPT procedure coding system soon became the standard. Another milestone in the
history of medical coding!
In August 2000, the Transactions and Code Sets Final Rule mandated that CPT, HCPCS Level II (see
below), and their modifiers should be used as the standard national medical code sets.
HCPCS: Supplies, Medicines, and Other Services
The Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System, Level II (HCPCS) describes the supplies, medicines,
or other services used during a patient visit.
As CPT codes are actually a part of the HCPCS system (they’re considered HCPCS Level I codes), they
were both developed, maintained, and mandated at the same time.
There are lots of parts of the HCPCS code set that change every year, as medicines and new
technologies are developed for state-of-the-art treatments. Because of this, the HCPCS code set is less
rigid than its partner, the CPT coding system.
From the history of medical coding to its future…
Right now is a very exciting time to be in medical coding. The implementation of the ICD-10 system
marks a new era in the American medical industry – it will be sure to change many aspects of the daily
life of a medical coder.
As medicine becomes more reliant on technology and web-based medical records, more changes are
sure to take place involving medical billing and coding guidelines and the preservation and
confidentiality of medical records.
As the medical industry changes, so does our medical coding and billing system. And as they have done
in the past, our three coding systems are very likely to change again soon.
Perhaps you’ll build a long enough career to see ICD-9 change into ICD-10, and then something else. The
history of medical coding is continuing right now, and the future is full of potential!

Read about a career as a medical coding specialist.
Read more: http://www.mb-guide.org/history-of-medical-coding.html#ixzz6RhRKJxkM

Click to access Celeste%20Solum%20-%20ICD%20Codes.pdf

http://www.mb-guide.org/icd-10-codes.html

 

https://www.icd10data.com/ICD10CM/EIndex

 

Fair Use Notice: Images/logos/graphics on this page contains some copyrighted material whose use has not been authorized by the copyright owners. We believe that this not-for-profit, educational, and/or criticism or commentary use on the Web constitutes a fair use of the copyrighted material (as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law).

Symptom tracking app required for employment

Nearly half a million people in one county are being required to download a COVID-19 symptom tracking app or use other means of daily reporting symptoms before the government will allow them to return to work. These restrictions are coming from the Health Officer in Sonoma County, CA.

Sick people should stay home. But I have deep concerns about the government inserting itself into the employee/employer relationship—and even more problems with the government using technology to control who can and cannot work. I see significant risk for abuse of power through the use of this technology.

Do you trust government leaders like those in Seattle and elsewhere to protect you and have your best interest in mind?

We have seen damaging policies originate before in California and then spread across America. We need to stop this power grab and fight for freedom. Let this health official, our governors, and legislators know that COVID-19 tracking must be voluntary, not mandatory. – Mat

In Sonoma County, CA, the Health Officer is calling the shots. She decides when you can go to church or get your hair cut. Public Health Officer Dr. Sundari Mase started in her role as an interim leader just three months ago. She immediately started controlling the entire county through stay-at-home orders and received a 30+ percent pay increase for her role in putting small businesses out of business.

In addition, Sonoma Co. paid IBM 160,000 dollars to create this app to check and track people. This is a case in point of what I have been warning you about. This app is “voluntary”—unless you want to go to work, that is. Then it suddenly becomes mandatory.

The county requires that this app/web system be used by anyone that wants to go to work. The launch date was originally June 1, but that date has been pushed back due to problems rolling out the app.

The Sonoma Index-Tribune reported, “business owners have expressed little to no opposition to the requirement to this point.” Many people in California are blind to the huge problems this app could create. It forces adults to act like children getting their hall pass from the government to be able to go to work.

Now is the time to fight against this unconstitutional power grab and remind our elected officials all across America that they are public servants and not kings to order us around. Send your fax to this health official’s office and to our elected officials to publicly oppose this mandatory app.

This county has just one of the many apps that are already developed. There are eight more apps that are being pushed by local governors, such as CovidSafe in Washington, HealthyTogether in Utah, and Care19 in North and South Dakota, just to name a few.

In addition, there are other shocking COVID-19 apps, such as CarePassport, which describes itself as a “universal patient engagement platform” that can monitor vital signs through devices like a FitBit and then shares those vital signs with “the facility physicians” with no mention of privacy or control or restrictions.

Another app with privacy concerns is Corona Care, through which doctors register their patients with a special QR code. It works with FitBit and sends automatic notices to the doctor about a person’s health status. It will “track if individuals have moved from low- to high-risk groups” and automatically alert the hospital of this—again, with no notice of privacy. In addition, this app pushes those with the app to the front of the line and encourages doctors to “categorize” patients based on the app.

These apps are taking away freedom and destroying privacy. This app was built by Harvard Medical and Mass General Hospital. They are setting up a situation where medical treatment could be given to those who have the app as a higher priority than those who have not downloaded it yet.

Do you really want your local hospital knowing every time your heart beats a little faster? It is time to stop these plans to destroy your medical privacy, personal privacy, and liberty. Let our nation’s leaders know that patriots will not stand for this by sending a fax for freedom.

Liberty Counsel Action is leading the national conversation about privacy and liberty in this steady attack against your freedom. We are doing research and digging up the truth, even when few are talking about it. We completely rely on donations to carry on this mission. Your financial support is the only reason we can continue to expose this attack on your freedom. Will you keep us in the fight with your donation today?

Thank you for your concern and support. This is one of the most intense times of battle that our organization has ever faced. I’m proud to be on a team with you facing down these well-funded giants’ intent on destroying liberty in America.

Sincerely,

Chairman

P.S. Government officials are exerting a shocking level of control over Americans. I need your help to act quickly and fight against this county from requiring a “hall-pass” type of app to be able to go to work.

If we ignore this, it could easily spread from one community and spill out of California into the rest of the country. Now is the moment to rise up to demand that our God-given liberties enshrined in the Constitution outlast our generation. Send a fax demanding that politicians stop this power grab. And then sign our petition straight to the White House.

Please know that our team is praying for you and the work God is doing in your life. If you can support Liberty Counsel Action with a donation of any size today, we would deeply appreciate your partnership with us. God bless you.

Data Management Plan – Coding and Reconciliation

All Adverse Events and Previous/Concomitant Medication should be coded and/or approved prior and during the trial.

Before adverse event terms can be reported or analyzed, they must be grouped based on their similarities. For example, headache, mild headache and acute head should all be counted as the same kind of event. This is done by matching (or coding) the reported adverse events against a large codelist of adverse events which is also known as dictionary or thesaurus.

Test cases and other documentation associated with the testing of auto-coding should be produced/documented.  This documentation is not part of the plan. It is a product of the design process and should be filed separately in the TMF system.

In the DMP. you should document the variables and the dictionary to be used.

For Concomitant Medications, WHO drug reference list is used.  Also document the version used and if applicable, the final version of the who drug (for trials running over 6 months).

For Adverse event, MedDRA dictionary is the choice of coding method. Document the version used.

Serious Adverse Event (SAE) Reconciliation:

Indicate SAE Reconciling Approach to be used to compare SAE database (e.g. Argus) to the Clinical study| database (e.g. EDC):

  • Indicate tools to be used
  • Location of SAE data
  • Planned timing
  • Planned frequency of SAE Reconciliation activities

What to look for during reconciliation:

  • There are matched cases but minor differences such as onset date
  • Case found in the CDMS but not in the SAE system
  • Case found in the SAE system but not in the CDM system

Methods for Reconciliation:

For electronic-automatic reconciliation between systems, there are some challenges you need to identify first such as which type of data is to be reconciled and then which fields to compare. Best practice is to reconciled those considered serious according to regulatory definitions.

For manual reconciliation, reports such as SAS listings extracted from both systems with study information, subject or investigator and other key data can be used to perform manual review.  A manual comparison of the events can then assure that they are both complete and comparable.

Central Coding Anayansi Gamboa
Central Coding

No matter which method you used for reconciliation, each type of data (eg, AE, MedHist, Conmed) should document which glossaries and version were used.

When data from the clinical trial database is entered into a drug safety database for coding, the data between the two systems should be reconciled to verify the data in both systems are

identical. The processes and frequency of reconciliation should be specified.

Source:

DIA -A Model Data Management Plan StandardOperating Procedure: Results From

the DIA Clinical Data Management Community, Committee on Clinical Data Management Plan

-FAIR ;USE-
“Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.”

Anayansi Gamboa has an extensive background in clinical data management as well as experience with different EDC systems including Oracle InForm, InForm Architect, Central Designer, CIS, Clintrial, Medidata Rave, Central Coding, Medrio, IBM eCOS, OpenClinica Open Source and Oracle Clinical.