Q: Is it okay to code a diagnosis if the physician documents two diagnoses using the phrase “versus” between them? For example, the patient arrives with abdominal pain and the physician orders labs and other tests, but they all come back normal. In the discharge note, the physician documents “abdominal pain, gastroenteritis versus irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).” When I first started as a CDI specialist I was told we could not use diagnoses when "versus” was stated, and that we had to query for clarification.
Q: A few days into the patient’s stay, an order for a Foley catheter was placed for incontinence and around the same time the physician documented a urinary tract infection (UTI). Would it be appropriate to query the physician regarding the relationship of the UTI to the Foley? Our infection control department caught this but we did not. I am concerned about this for two reasons; first, I worry about writing a leading query and second, whether the UTI could be considered a hospital-acquired condition (HAC) if additional documentation isn’t provided.
Each new CMS fiscal year, MS-DRG weight and classification changes in the CMS IPPS final rule are closely scrutinized by coders and CDI specialists to identify any potential impact on documentation capture and code assignment processes.
QUESTION: For a healing traumatic finger amputation with concern but no diagnosis of infection at the amputation site (the physician prescribed Bactrim), is it correct to assign code V54.89 (other orthopedic aftercare) and ICD-9-CM code 886.x (traumatic amputation of finger)?
According to the ICD-9-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting, it’s unusual for two or more diagnoses to meet the definition of principal diagnosis. Coders know the opposite is true. William E. Haik, MD, FCCP, CDIP, Donna Didier, MEd, RHIA, CCS, and Cheryl Ericson, MS, RN, CCDS, CDIP, offer tips for determining whether multiple conditions meet the criteria for principal diagnosis.
The UHDDS defines principal diagnosis as the condition established after study to be chiefly responsible for occasioning the admission of the patient to the hospital for care. That means the principal diagnosis is not always the condition that brought the patient into the hospital.
Q: Using the ICD-10-CM guidelines for the seventh character extensions for fracture codes, how should I identify each of the following? Avascular necrosis following fracture Cast change or removal Emergency treatment Evaluation and management by a new physician Follow-up visits following fracture treatment Infection on open fracture site Malunion of fracture Nonunion of fracture Medication adjustment Patient delayed seeking treatment for the fracture or nonunion Removal of external of internal fixation device Surgical treatment
Physicians often use the terms acute renal failure (ARF) and acute kidney injury (AKI) interchangeably to describe an abrupt decrease in kidney function that is reversible within three months of loss of function.
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?
