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: 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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: 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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
In many instances, payers may consider a drug to be self-administered in some circumstances but not in others. As a result, coders must pay special attention to how these drugs are used within their setting. Kimberly Anderwood Hoy, JD, CPC, and Valerie Rinkle, MPA, offer some tips and suggestions for reporting self-administered drugs and determining when the drug is integral to the service.
Perhaps you're familiar with the following scenario: A hospital submits a short-stay inpatient (Part A) claim. An auditor, such as a RAC or MAC, reviews the claim and deems the admission to be not reasonable and necessary due to the hospital billing the wrong setting. The auditor issues a denial for the full amount of the claim. Although the hospital may rebill for certain Part B ancillary services before the timely filing limit, it may not bill for any of the other outpatient services denied as part of the inpatient claim.
The task of assigning the appropriate present on admission (POA) indicator for various conditions is still fraught with a number of challenges—many of which stem from problems coders have in obtaining clear, explicit physician documentation. Colleen Stukenberg, MSN, RN, CCDS, CMSRN, and Donna D. Wilson, RHIA, CCS, CCDS, discuss how gleaning the necessary details from the records can be a daunting task in and of itself, and then inconsistencies among various physicians makes assigning POA indicators that much harder.
QUESTION: A physician admits a 30-year-old male with lower abdominal pain. A CT scan showed consistency with perforated appendicitis. However, the patient had an appendectomy 10 months prior. The physician documents "appendiceal stump syndrome." How should I code this case?
