CMS and auditors are increasing scrutiny of CCs and MCCs. William E. Haik, MD, FCCP, CDIP, provides tips that coders can use to look for clinical evidence in the record before querying for these targeted conditions.
CMS not only redefines inpatient status in the 2014 IPPS proposed rule, but it also discusses the ‘why’ and ‘how’ physicians should document the defining characteristic of all admissions: medical necessity. Glenn Krauss, BBA, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPUR, C-CDI, CCDS, and Cheryl Ericson, MS, RN, CCDS, CDIP, explain how the proposals could impact inpatient admissions.
Q: A surgeon’s dictated report for a right hip hemiarthroplasty states the following: Of note, while drilling one of our transosseous suture holes with a 2.0 mm drill bit, the end of the drill bit broke off inside of the trochanter. It seemed to be quite deep into the bone and was not retrievable. As such, it was left in place. Should we report 998.4 (foreign body accidentally left during a procedure) for this case?
Under a new ruling, CMS allows full Part B payment for inpatient stays that a contractor denies because it deems them to be not reasonable and necessary. David Danek and Ann Marshall, both from CMS, explain how the rebilling works under the ruling and what will be different under a simultaneously released proposed rule.
Coders should question the validity of coding advice and work collaboratively with physicians to develop sound coding guidelines. Last month, I addressed coding advice related to percutaneous endoscopic gastrojejunostomy and cardiorenal syndrome. This month, I’ll address coding advice related to several other conditions.
In February, AHIMA published an update to its 2010 query practice brief. The updated brief, Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice, is the result of a joint effort between AHIMA and the Association for Clinical Documentation Improvement Specialists (ACDIS). ?
DRGs for procedures unrelated to the principal diagnosis should occur rarely. Robert S. Gold, MD, and Cheryl Ericson, MS, RN, CCDS, CDIP, explain when it is appropriate to report an unrelated DRG.
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
When Lori Belanger, RN, BSN, RHIT, inpatient coder and CDI specialist at Northern Maine Medical Center in Fort Kent, Maine, began to practice coding charts using ICD-10-CM/PCS, she was a bit surprised by how much her productivity decreased.
DRGs for procedures unrelated to the principal diagnosis shouldn't occur frequently. If they do, coding managers should take a closer look at coding compliance efforts to ensure accuracy and avoid costly audits.
The OIG is taking a closer look at mechanical ventilation, according to its FY 2013 Work Plan. William E. Haik, MD, FCCP, CDIP, and Glenn Krauss, BBA, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPUR, C-CDI, CCDS, explain why your facility should do the same.
Q: Can you clarify the requirements surrounding the use of E codes? We have been working on documentation concerns related to patient safety indicator (PSI) 15 and wonder if E codes are required. Can a facility simply decide not to use them?
Coders remain highly accurate when reporting present-on-admission (POA) indicators, but they need to maintain that accuracy. The OIG reiterates the importance of POA reporting in terms of monitoring hospital quality of care and the role that such reporting plays in CMS’ effort to align payment incentives with patient outcomes. Glenn Krauss, BBA, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPUR, C-CDI, CCDS, and Nena Scott, MS, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, offer tips to ensure complaint POA reporting.
Q: A patient with undiagnosed syncope is admitted to observation. Later that evening, the patient is diagnosed with syncope and develops complications that warrant an inpatient admission. Should the patient be considered an inpatient from the time inpatient criteria are met or from the time the inpatient order is written?
Everyone knows that CCs and MCCs are under scrutiny these days. However, that doesn't mean hospitals should err on the side of caution when reporting these conditions. William E. Haik, MD, FCCP, CDIP, director of DRG Review, Inc., in Fort Walton Beach, Fla., provides several tips that coders can employ to look for clinical evidence in the record before querying for these targeted conditions.
Q: A patient presents with a sore throat, and the physician states “Sore throat; differential diagnoses include streptococcal sore throat, tonsillitis, postnasal drip.” If the physician doesn’t rule out any of the differential diagnoses, should the coder query for clarification or simply choose one of the differential diagnoses?
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.
As more patients are being impacted by noncoverage of self-administered drugs, coders and billers need to know when and how to report drugs and drug administration services. Kimberly Anderwood Hoy, JD, CPC, and Valerie Rinkle, MPA, discuss the differences in how drugs are paid under Medicare Part A and Part B.
ICD-10-PCS differs significantly from ICD-9-CM procedure coding, but fortunately, the Cooperating Parties are providing plenty of guidelines. Laura Legg, RHIT, CCS, discusses some of the key ICD-10-PCS guidelines and why coders should learn them.
The ICD-9-CM guidelines state that it's unusual for two or more diagnoses to meet the definition of principal diagnosis. However, coders know this isn't exactly true, as the scenario tends to occur frequently.
In times of increased auditor scrutiny, it's important for coders to remind themselves of their strengths. Assigning the POA indicator is one of them, according to an OIG report released in November 2012.
Coders should avoid reporting signs and symptoms as the principal diagnosis when possible. However, that’s not always possible. William E. Haik, MD, FCCP, CDIP, reviews the ICD-9-CM principal diagnosis selection guidelines and when coders should report signs and symptoms as the principal diagnosis.
Q: One of our orthopedic surgeons started to perform spinal fusions percutaneously. CPT ® provides instruction on how to code this procedure; however, these are inpatient surgeries, so we need an ICD-9-CM code. We’re leaning toward code 81.00 (spinal fusion unspecified). Do you think this is the correct code?
Q: I’ve heard that queries differ between critical access and short-term acute care hospital settings. Is this true, and if so, where can I find more information?
MLN Matters ® article SE1236, which discusses documenting medical necessity for major joint replacements, may be aimed at physicians, but Glenn Krauss, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPUR, PCS, FCS, C-CDIS, and Lynn Marlow, BS, RHIT, CCS, explain how it also applies to hospitals and coders.
Physicians, especially ED physicians, need to start paying attention to how their documentation affects the facility. Glenn Krauss, BBA, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPUR, C-CDI, CCDS, and Bernadette Larson, CPMA, discuss how documentation in the ED affects medical necessity and inpatient coding.
Q: A patient has unintentionally failed to take a prescribed dosage of insulin due to his Alzheimer’s dementia (age-related debility), and is admitted for initial care with inadequately controlled Type 1 diabetes mellitus. Which ICD-10-CM code(s) should we assign?
Q: As a traveling consultant, I review many types of inpatient hospital records. As hospitals have implemented electronic health records (EHR), I’ve seen documentation worsen. The ability to cut and paste information in the record has compromised coding accuracy. It has also increased the volume of queries, which frustrates physicians. For example, a physician performs a history and physical (H&P) in his or her office one week prior to admitting a patient to the hospital. The first progress note in the EHR—as well as each subsequent progress note—includes the exact same documentation. This documentation, which continues for four days while the patient is in the hospital, is clearly based on the original H&P. Obviously, the documentation has been copied and pasted from one note to another. Even the patient’s vital signs remain exactly the same as they were in the physician’s office. Coders have no way of knowing whether physicians who treat the patient in the hospital agree with any test findings because residents simply cut and paste the results in each subsequent progress note. Residents claim that they do this solely for the attending physician’s convenience. Clinical documentation improvement (CDI) specialists don’t address the problem because they are more focused on determining the accuracy of the MS-DRG. Is there a solution that will keep physicians, coders, and CDI specialists all on the same page?
Robert S. Gold, MD, gives coding guidance on primary cardiomyopathy, SIRS, sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and conditions during the perinatal period.
Q: Should we query for the specific pulmonary exacerbation of cystic fibrosis (CF)? Coding Clinic states that the exacerbation of CF should be listed first.
Every few years, the AHA publishes guidance in Coding Clinic that can significantly affect inpatient coders, such as guidance published in the Second Quarter 2012 on neoplasm coding. Randy Wagner, BSN, RN, CCS, and Paul Dickson, MD, CCS, CPC, review the new guidance and how to use the TNM cancer staging system.
Coders can go a bit overboard when reporting CCs and MCCs. Cheryl Ericson, MS, RN, CCDS, CDIP, and Deborah K. Hale, CCS, CCDS, reveal the dangers of over-reporting CCs and MCCs and how to report them appropriately.
Every few years, the AHA publishes guidance in Coding Clinic that can significantly affect inpatient coders. Coding Clinic , Second Quarter 2012, includes such guidance.
Inpatient-only procedures are those that CMS has determined providers must perform on an inpatient basis. Kimberly Anderwood Hoy, JD, CPC, and Beverly Cunningham, MS, RN, unravel the complexities of coding for these procedures.
Provider documentation of inpatient wound care services may be confusing at best and completely lacking at worst. Coders end up trying to decipher exactly what procedure the provider performed. Gloryanne Bryant, BS, RHIA, RHIT, CCS, CDIP, CCDS, and Robert S. Gold, MD, offer tips to assist coders in choosing the correct code for inpatient wound care.
Q: I have a question about coding transplant complications. My understanding is if the complication affects the transplanted organ, then coders should assign a code for the transplant complication itself. Is this correct? Consider the following physician documentation: Final A/P: Acute renal failure in patient with history of renal transplant. Should coders report 996.81 (complications of transplanted kidney) and 584.9 (acute kidney failure, unspecified)? Also consider this documentation: CHF in heart transplant patient . Should coders report 996.83 (complications of transplanted heart) and 428.0 (CHF, unspecified)?
As you may know, ICD-9-CM V codes have been expanded to include higher body mass indexes (BMI). More specifically, code category V85.4x denotes a BMI of 40 or more in an adult. How can you calculate BMI?
Inpatient-only procedures are those that CMS has determined providers must perform on an inpatient basis because they are invasive and require at least 24 hours of postoperative recovery time or monitoring.
Coders play a crucial role in ensuring compliance, and the FY 2013 IPPS final rule , released August 1, gives them many reasons to showcase their skills. William E. Haik, MD, FCCP, CDIP, and Glenn Krauss, BBA, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPUR, C-CDI, CCDS, detail the changes and how coders can take charge of them.
Patients aren’t the only ones paying attention to quality scores these days. Payers are, too. Cheryl Manchenton, RN, BSN, and Audrey G. Howard, RHIA, explain why coders and clinical documentation improvement specialists must understand which conditions affect provider profiles.
Q: I need further clarification regarding documentation of toxic metabolic encephalopathy. I’m trying to code two different cases in which a physician documents acute mental status change secondary to an infectious process . In each case, the patient’s metabolic panels don’t appear to be abnormal; however, one of the patients is septic. The physician thinks that documenting and coding sepsis separately from encephalopathy would result in unbundling. However, I disagree because coding the sepsis separately demonstrates severity. What is the correct logic to use in each of these cases?
Q: A patient has been diagnosed with peritonsillar cellulitis and oropharyngeal cellulitis. The physician documents that he performed a “needle aspiration of the left peritonsillar abscess.” In the body of the operative report, the physician states, “An 18-gauge needle was inserted and 1 cc of pus was aspirated. This was sent for aerobic, anaerobic, C&S [culture & sensitivity], and gram stain. I then put the 18-gauge needle in again and multiple passes were obtained without any aspirate.” Because ICD-9-CM does not include a code for “aspiration of peritonsillar abscess” some coders wanted to use ICD-9-CM procedure code 28.0 (incision and drainage of tonsil and peritonsillar structures) while others want to report code 28.99 (other operations on tonsils and adenoids). Which code is correct?
Physicians often use the acronyms IBS (which should indicate irritable bowel syndrome) and IBD (which should indicate inflammatory bowel disease) interchangeably even though they represent completely different conditions with different treatment and prognoses. Robert S. Gold, MD, and Drew K. Siegel, MD, CPC, offer tips on how to decipher documentation related to these two conditions.
Physicians often use the acronyms IBS (which should indicate irritable bowel syndrome) and IBD (which should indicate inflammatory bowel disease) interchangeably even though they represent completely different conditions with different treatment and prognoses.
QUESTION: I'd like to address our coders' questions on how to code poisoning due to bath salts. Internet research has led me to many different options: codes 977.8 (other specified drug/medicinal), 970.89 (other CNS stimulant), 969.70 (psychostimulant, unspecified), among others. What would you suggest? There don't seem to be any guidelines out there and the coding for this seems to be all over the place.
The digestion process is complex and there’s a lot that can go wrong. Thankfully, Robert S. Gold, MD, unravels the topic of mechanical and paralytic ileuses in this week’s article.
QUESTION: A patient is admitted with pneumonia and atrial fibrillation and both are present on admission. The patient receives antibiotics for the pneumonia and a pacemaker during the stay, but undergoes no other procedures. Does the procedure automatically make ICD-9-CM code 427.31 for the atrial fibrillation the principal diagnosis?
New clinical guidelines for malnutrition could help alleviate compliance challenges associated with coding the condition, which has never had universally accepted clinical criteria. Jane White, James S. Kennedy, MD, CCS, CDIP, and Alice Zentner, RHIA, describe the new guidelines and what coders need to know about malnutrition coding.
ICD-10-CM coronary artery disease and myocardial infarction codes will undoubtedly differ from their ICD-9-CM counterparts in some ways, but some aspects will remain the same.
Why do coders need to know about Value Based Purchasing, the Readmissions Reduction Program, and Hierarchical Condition Categories codes? Glenn Krauss, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPUR, C-CDI, CCDS, explains why it all comes back to coding accuracy and complete documentation.
QUESTION: A patient was exposed to shingles, for which a coder reported ICD-9-CM code V01.79 (exposure to other viral diseases, including HIV). This poses a problem for billing as code V01.79 is a confidential diagnosis, requiring special release of information from the patient and would remain on the insurance record. As an RN and certified coder, I believed code V01.71 (exposure to varicella) is the correct code because the varicella virus causes both chicken pox and shingles. However, I am being overridden by the chief business office. Which code is correct?
Medical necessity denials traditionally focus on high-dollar MS-DRGs, such as those for hip and knee replacements; other MS-DRGs may also soon become targets, such as inpatient wound care, according to Nelly Leon-Chisen, RHIA, and Glenn Krauss, BBA, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPUR, PCS, FCS, C-CDIS, CCDS. Krauss and Leon-Chisen discuss coverage determinations, excisional vs. nonexcisional debridement, debridement of multiple layers, and more.
Choosing a principal diagnosis can be tricky for coders. Luckily, Gloryanne Bryant, BS, RHIA, RHIT, CCS, CDIP, CCDS, and Robert S. Gold, MD, help unravel the complexities of principal diagnosis selection.
QUESTION: Do you predict coder productivity will decline as a result of ICD-10? If so, what do you think the declines will be six months after implementation?
Inpatient hospitals will see CMS payment rates increase 2.3% in FY 2013 if the agency finalizes the change in the IPPS proposed rule released in April. CMS expects that in FY 2013, the documentation and coding adjustment will net an aggregate 0.2% increase. Other quality-of-care initiatives could reduce payments.
Many physicians say that systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria are insufficient and confusing at best, and don't indicate whether a patient is truly sick. Some patients may meet necessary criteria for SIRS and truly have sepsis or another severe diagnosis. Others, however, may meet two of four criteria but not actually have SIRS. Where does all of this information leave coders? Often between a rock and hard place. Jennifer E. Avery, CCS, CPC-H, CPC, CPC-I, and Robert S. Gold, MD, offer seven tips for coders who need to negotiate tricky sepsis coding.
Depending on the demographics of the region a hospital serves, its coders could determine code assignment for hundreds of deliveries and pregnancy-related services annually. Lori-Lynne Webb, CPC, CCS-P, CCP, CHDA, COBGC, and Susan Proctor, RHIT, CCS, CPC, review the relevant coding guidelines for coders who handle coding for these patient encounters.
QUESTION: Our pulmonologists are not comfortable documenting acute respiratory failure unless the patient is on a ventilator. Also, they rarely document chronic respiratory failure, even in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients on continuous home oxygen. I’m trying to develop standard query forms for acute and chronic respiratory failure and am running into these obstacles. How do you recommend handling this problem?
Although MS-DRGs have stolen the spotlight since CMS implemented them in 2007, hospitals are increasingly using All Patient Refined DRGs (APR-DRG) to compile the most accurate assessment of patient severity of illness (SOI) and risk of mortality (ROM). Cheryl M. Manchenton, RN, BSN, and Tamara A. Hicks, RN, BSN, MHA, CCS, CCDS, ACM, describe why APR-DRGs are the most widely-used SOI and ROM-adjusted DRGs and how organizations can use them to their advantage.
QUESTION: A physician documents in an operative report debridement of a necrotic muscle (not due to an open wound). Must the physician also document how the muscle is removed to report ICD-9-CM procedure code 83.45 (other myectomy)? Is this considered excisional or nonexcisional debridement? What documentation is required to code the removal of a necrotic portion of a muscle?
Depending on the demographics of the region a hospital serves, its coders could determine code assignment for hundreds of deliveries and pregnancy-related services annually — reviewing coding guidelines is helpful.
Unfortunately, ICD-10-PCS is not very comparable to the current ICD-9-CM volume 3 codes inpatient coders currently use. But coders shouldn’t despair, according to Sandy Nicholson, MA, RHIA, Jennifer Avery, CCS, CPC-H, CPC, CPC-I and Robert S. Gold, MD —ICD-10-PC coding may even be fun once coders get the hang of it.
QUESTION: How will we be able to code for procedures such as Billroth procedures, Roux-en-Y anastomoses, and Whipple’s procedure when eponyms won’t be used in ICD-10-PCS?
As charges become more specific to provide additional concrete and transparent cost data, providers must consider what procedures they routinely provide to patients and what procedures are specifically related to the patient's condition. Denise Williams, RN, CPC-H, and Kimberly Anderwood Hoy, JD, CPC, reveal tips for determining when to separately bill for ancillary bedside services provided to inpatients.
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)?
Coders and billers may not completely understand how to charge for inpatient supplies. One misconception is that the room rate incorporates all supplies used for every inpatient. Another misconception is that payers will not separately pay for inpatient supplies.
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.
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?
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.
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).
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?
Knowing when and how to query for all conditions is crucial; this couldn't be truer for CCs and MCCs, conditions that affect payment and help capture a patient's true clinical picture and complexity.
Robert S. Gold, MD, discusses updates to the code definitions and exclusions for various lung diseases, such as pulmonary insufficiency and respiratory failure, and cautions coders about the potential for over-reporting conditions that patients don't have or for identifying conditions that do not meet the intent of the codes.
QUESTION: Can a patient have encephalopathy after surgery? For example, a patient becomes confused post-surgery and is transferred from the medical-surgical floor to the intensive care unit, where he or she receives high doses of pain medication via IV. However, the patient recovers well and the confusion disappears after the IV fluids and reduction in pain medication and oxygen. Would it be appropriate to query the physician regarding encephalopathy and its possible cause, or would this be a red flag for auditors? The situation did extend the patient’s length of stay by one day.
Coders who keep in mind the injuries that define multiple significant trauma are more likely to identify these cases and assign DRGs based on this classification when present. Joel Moorhead, MD, PhD, CPC, and Beverly (Cross) Selby, RHIT, CCS, examine what defines multiple significant trauma and discuss the coding guidelines for these sometimes complicated cases.
