QUESTION: We are having a discussion about how to code when the studies section of the history and physical (H&P) indicates that the chest x-ray showed atelectasis or that an electrocardiogram showed right bundle branch block with anterior fascicular block. Some of us believe that it’s okay to code the diagnosis (i.e., atelectasis) if the provider states that the testing “showed” the diagnosis, whereas others believe we cannot code the diagnosis as it is a lab/testing result, and the provider could just be reading the results onto his or her H&P dictation. I realize you cannot go to the testing result itself and code from it directly. However, I argue that it would be okay to code for it because the provider is using this information to make decisions about care, testing, and procedures, and he or she indicates the testing results in the H&P body. What are your thoughts?
How does medical necessity get “overlooked” on the physician side as well as the inpatient side? Case managers, utilization review staff, physician advisors, CDI specialists, and coders, each carry out specific duties and responsibilities when reviewing medical records. Glenn Krauss, BBA, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPUR, FCS, PCS, C-CDIS, CCDS, examines contributing factors and takes a closer look at guidelines Trailblazer Health recently issued defining specific joint replacement (DRG 470) documentation that both hospitals and physicians should follow to support medical necessity.
Coders are constantly analyzing documentation for clues and details that may indicate the need for a physician query. For example, coders should watch for clinical evidence that points to a condition that the physician may not have explicitly documented. Coders also need to be wary of reporting conditions without accounting for context or other clinical indicators in the documentation. William E. Haik, MD, CDIP, explains how this can lead to inappropriate reporting of an MCC, for example, that the overall clinical picture does not support.
"What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." [caption id="attachment_2635" align="alignright" width="150" caption="It's Pandemonium!"] [/caption] Ah, dear...
Poor Wile E. Coyote ® . He just came into the Acme ED with a skull fracture caused by a falling boulder. It seems the Roadrunner ® got away again. Dr. Frankenbean documents a closed fracture of the...
The Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) may do more harm than good by delaying ICD-10-CM/PCS implementation, according to survey, Industry Reaction to Potential Delay of ICD-10 ,...
The transition to ICD-10-CM is coming. The only question is when. Despite the possible delay, coders and other HIM professionals must continue to prepare for the transition. Shannon E. McCall, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPC, CPC-I, CEMC, CCDS, Sandy Nicholson, MA, RHIA, Robert S. Gold, MD, Jennifer Avery, CCS, CPC-H, CPC, CPC-I, and Kim Felix, RHIA, CCS, provide information on how ICD-10-CM will—and will not—differ from ICD-9-CM.
Knowing spinal anatomy provides the foundation necessary to assign codes both before and after the switch to ICD-10-CM. Shelley C. Safian, Kim Pollock, RN, MBA, CPC, and Shannon E. McCall, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPC, CPC-I, CEMC, CCDS, guide coders through the anatomy and common coding situations in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM.
The American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA) has urged CMS not to delay ICD-10-CM/PCS implementation in its February 23 letter to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius . Meanwhile, the...
Who knew St. Patrick’s Day was such a dangerous holiday? Take a look around the Fix ‘Em Up Clinic and see for yourself. First, we have Bobby, who was looking for a four-leaf clover. Unfortunately, he...
The Office of E-Health Standards and Services (OESS) announced a second delay in the enforcement of HIPAA 5010, CMS announced March 15 . OESS announced the first enforcement delay November 17, 2011...
ICD-10-CM is full of oddly specific codes for causes of injuries. Some of them are funny (I’m talking to you, W61.43, pecked by turkey) and others are so strange that most coders will probably never...
QUESTION: Recently, reviewers have denied diagnostic code 584.9 (acute renal failure [ARF]) based on lab values. The diagnosis is well documented and treated by the attending physician, but reviewers are stating the lab values do not support the diagnosis of ARF. The lab values (creatinine/blood urea nitrogen) went from normal to abnormal, and we found no definitive standards for lab parameters to meet the definition of ARF. Following coding guidelines for reporting secondary diagnoses, the ARF was clinically evaluated, the patient received therapeutic and diagnostic procedures, and there was an extended length of stay/increased nursing care. As coders, we feel it is inappropriate to question the physician’s clinical judgment, and reporting the ARF as a secondary diagnosis is correct. Based on the documentation in the record, is it appropriate to code the ARF?
When a provider notes a diagnosis on the hospital-acquired condition (HAC) list, coders must be diligent about looking throughout the rest of the chart to ensure documentation clearly indicates the presence of a HAC. For example, if the condition is a pressure ulcer, the condition may have been present on admission. Shelia Bullock, RN, BSN, MBA, CCM, CCDS, and Beverly Cunningham, MS, RN, address the importance of coder participation as members of hospital HAC committees and the development of best practices to ensure accurate HAC and HCAC reporting.
What should inpatient coders remember about the three-day payment window requirements? Although it may seem counterintuitive, Debbie Mackaman, RHIA, CHCO, and Marion G. Kruse, RN, MBA, explain that inpatient coders need to be aware of certain outpatient services that they may need to include on inpatient claims, as well as when they need to alert billers to assign condition code 51.
Special Edition MLN Matters article #SE1210 , “Recovery Auditors Findings Resulting from Medical Necessity Reviews of Renal and Urinary Tract Disorders,” outlines recovery auditor findings upon completion of medical necessity reviews. In the article, which addresses documentation and billing for inpatients, recovery auditors concluded that providers had been admitting patients even for clinical situations for which outpatient observation services would have been appropriate.
Physicians use a lot of shortcuts and abbreviations. Some of them may even make it onto the official abbreviation list at their hospital. Some don’t. And even if they did, some physicians will use the wrong term. Robert S. Gold, MD, discusses an example that was featured in the January Medicare Quarterly Provider Compliance Newsletter regarding proper identification and ICD-9-CM coding of a bronchoscopy with biopsy (TBB) vs. a bronchoscopic lung biopsy (TBLB).
The ICD-10-PCS defines root operations excision and resection in a very similar way. Excision is cutting out or off, without replacement, a portion of a body part. Coders should report the qualifier...
