Q: My question is about the time interval requirement of the CPT ® add-on code 96376 (each additional sequential intravenous push of the same substance/drug provided in a facility [list separately in addition to code primary procedure]), which says that more than 30 minutes must pass between administrations of same substances in order to report it. In our ED, cardiac patients are frequently started on heparin—a bolus given for less than 16 minutes and a drip given over several hours. These are frequently charted in the electronic record as having been given at the same time. In this case, is it still appropriate to report 96365 (intravenous infusion, for therapy, prophylaxis, or diagnosis; initial, up to 1 hour) for the first hour of drip and 96376 for the bolus, or must the administration be given greater than 30 minutes apart?

Q: When coding excision of a breast mass with needle localization using stereotactic guidance, we report CPT ® code 19125 (excision of breast lesion identified by preoperative placement of radiological marker, open; single lesion) and new code 19283 (placement of breast localization devices, percutaneous; first lesion, including stereotactic guidance). The 3M system says Medicare NCCI edits consider this separate reporting of codes that are components of the comprehensive procedure if billed for services provided to the same beneficiary by the same physician on the same day. These codes will be rebundled by the Medicare payer and payment will be based on code 19125 only. Does that mean to only report 19125 for this kind of case? If there is an excision of a lesion by one surgeon and needle localization done by a radiologist, can we report 19125, with 19283 and modifier -59 (distinct procedural service)? We can’t find any official reference for this issue for 2014. How do we code excision of a breast mass with needle localization now?

Q: I am auditing a note for a fusion. The note lacks detail, therefore is hard to justify. The patient had a prior hardware placement. The note describes dissecting down, debridement of necrotic bone, and tissue work done. This is the entire note, after describing dissection, “Vigorous irrigation with 10 liters of saline and antibiotics was carried out. Hemostasis was maintained. The right S1 screw and rod portion was removed as it was notably loose. Additional decortication and onlay bone grafting was performed at L1-S1. Drains were placed…” They coded: 22612 (arthrodesis, posterior or posterolateral technique, single level; lumbar) Add-on code 22614 (each additional vertebral segment) x4 22852 (removal of posterior segmental instrumentation) In the procedures performed area of the note, they state: Hardware removal, lumbar Revision fusion L1-S1 with onlay bone graft Irrigation and debridement of lumbar spine wound Since there is nothing in the note regarding autografting, I assume this is an allograft? Should this be coded? Also is that documentation enough to justify arthrodesis? Modifier -GC (this service has been performed in part by a resident under the direction of a teaching physician) was appended, although the language was not added for this. I can only assume a resident dictated this.

An overwhelming 87% of respondents to a recent survey by Navicure of physician practices said they are at least "somewhat confident" they will be ready for ICD-10 implementation by October 1.