The goals of coding should always be ensuring data accuracy and capturing a patient's true clinical picture. Knowing the intent of an ICD-9-CM code is crucial. However, coding guidelines and official coding guidance sometimes conflict with these goals, putting coders between a rock and a hard place. Robert S. Gold, MD, examines cardiomyopathy, a disease that affects the heart muscle, as an example of a diagnosis that is frequently misreported due to inaccurate guidance.
Although the New Year marked the deadline for Version 5010 compliance, CMS recently reminded providers that it will not exercise enforcement until April 1, 2012. Despite the 90-day discretionary period, CMS urged providers that they should complete the transition to Version 5010 as soon as possible. This extension will not have any effect on the implementation date for ICD-10-CM/PCS, which remains set for October 1, 2013.
Q: In my facility, we are supposed to send an email to our physician advisor (PA) and to administration if a query is not answered within a week. However, this policy doesn’t work well because administration does not do anything with that information, and the PA doesn’t have time to review unanswered queries. Do you have any suggestions concerning when to let a query go unanswered?
Q: If the physician documents “concerning for,” “considering,” “cannot be ruled out,” or “cannot be excluded” for a diagnosis, is that considered an uncertain diagnosis? Can those terms be coded if the patient is being worked up? Are the terms “concerning for” and “considering” equal to the uncertain diagnosis terms “yet to be ruled out”?
Q: I have been asked to build a query for a diagnosis of SIRS and/or sepsis for the following scenario: The patient was admitted for an infection urinary tract infection (UTI), pyelonephritis (PNA) and meets two SIRS criteria. The patient may be treated with oral or intravenous antibiotics, and may be on a general medical floor (not intensive care). The physician did not document SIRS or sepsis. I am having a hard time with this query because I am not sure if this would be considered adding new information to the chart or leading the physician by introducing a new diagnosis. Do you have any suggestions?
Q: Can “in the setting of”' be interpreted as “due to” in ICD-10-CM? For example, the physician documented that the patient has a urinary tract infection in the setting of a urinary catheter.
Q: When I started as a coder, I learned that the complication code, such as from ICD-9-CM series 998 or 999, takes precedence as the reason of admission when present with another contributing condition. Is this correct, and is there any written guidance from AHA Coding Clinic for ICD-9-CM/ICD-10-CM/PCS that discusses this?
Q: A patient came to the ED with shortness of breath (SOB). The admitting diagnosis was possible acute coronary syndrome (ACS) due to SOB and elevated troponin levels. The ACS was ruled out. Elevated troponin levels were assumed to be due to chronic renal failure (CRF), and no reason was given for SOB. Before discharge, the patient was noted with an elevated temperature and found to have a urinary tract infection (UTI). All treatment was directed at the UTI, and the doctor noted the discharge diagnosis as the UTI. What would be the principal diagnosis in this case?