Laurie L. Prescott, MSN, RN, CCDS, CDIP , writes that as many CDI teams work to expand their risk adjustment programs, a melding of two skill sets, that of CDI specialists and coding professionals, are required to succeed.
Since the physician doesn't need to document a specific root operation, coders cannot rely solely on the terms the physician uses; thus it is important for each coder to fully understand each root operation, including Restriction and Occlusion. Note: To access this free article, make sure you first register if you do not have a paid subscription.
Laura Legg, RHIT, CCS, CDIP , explains how the coming months will prove to be challenging for coders because of the new ICD-10 codes for both diagnoses and procedures beginning October 1. Along with that, we’ll see the end of the CMS grace period on code specificity for Part B physician payments and updated ICD-10-CM Official Coding Guidelines .
Q: I am with a CDI program that is starting to explore severity of illness/risk of mortality (SOI/ROM). I personally have been reviewing for SOI/ROM for quite a while. I usually designate the impact (MCC/CC/SOI/ROM) after the billing is done and see if what I queried for made a final impact, and only take credit for those that do. I was told that regardless of the actual final impact on SOI/ROM, we should be taking credit for any SOI/ROM clarification as SOI/ROM impact. Which is the most accurate, “correct” way to capture the CDI impact for these types of clarifications?
After an almost five-month deferment, the Beneficiary and Family Centered Care Quality Improvement Organizations resumed initial patient status reviews of short stays in acute care inpatient hospitals, long-term care hospitals, and inpatient psychiatric facilities, CMS announced on their website.
CMS recently released a fact sheet regarding the coding and billing of advance care planning services, following the release of a frequently asked questions document in July on the topic.
Updated ICD-10-CM guidelines, effective October 1, could cause confusion for some coders. Shannon E. McCall, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPC, CPC-I, CEMC, CRC, CCDS, looks at how changes to reporting linking conditions measure up to previous guidance.
Coders may not be aware of the impact place of service codes can have on coding and billing. Lori-Lynne A. Webb, CPC, CCS-P, CCP, CHDA, COBGC, CDIP, writes about how the codes are used and what coders should know about their application.
Shannon E. McCall, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPC, CPC-I, CEMC, CRC, CCDS, reviews additional changes to the ICD-10-CM guidelines for 2017, including coding and clinical criteria, new guidelines for Excludes1 notes, and updates for reporting pressure ulcers.
Q: Is it true that if the patient has hypertension and heart disease such as coronary artery disease that the coder may code the hypertension from the I11 (hypertensive heart disease) series of codes?
Sharme Brodie, RN, CCDS , discusses how to decipher between some potentially confusing—and possibly conflicting—information regarding diabetes documentation requirements.
Shannon Newell, RHIA, CCS, AHIMA-approved ICD-10-CM/PCS trainer, writes that the majority of the 2017 IPPS final rule updates are consistent with those outlined in the proposed rule, but contain a few refinements. She reviews refinements to the number of claims-based outcomes linked to payment.
Accurately reporting altered mental status and encephalopathy can be a challenge that requires coordination between coders and providers. James S. Kennedy, MD, CCS, CDIP, explains best practices for coding these tricky conditions. Note: To access this free article, make sure you first register if you do not have a paid subscription.
Q: The coders at my facility have started automatically linking congestive heart failure, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) to the combination code without any documentation of CHF “due to” hypertension. There is no documentation of hypertensive heart disease anywhere in the record, and the diagnoses are not linked anywhere in the record.
CMS released a national coverage determination recently covering a percutaneous left atrial appendage closure through their “coverage with evidence development” policy. CMS says this policy will be fully implemented on October 3, 2016.
CMS released the 2017 OPPS proposed rule on July 5 without much fanfare. On July 14, the Federal Register version was posted, and upon initial review, it seems rather short at 186 pages.
The fiscal year (FY) 2017 IPPS final rule was released August 2 and will be published in the Federal Register August 22. The majority of the finalized updates are consistent with those outlined in the proposed rule, but with a few refinements to applicable time periods. The final rule expands and refines the number of claims-based outcomes linked to payment under these programs. Let's review a few of the key changes to support your CDI program's strategic focus for the coming year.
Last month, I wrote about the role of coding and CDI compliance in ensuring the clinical validity of submitted ICD-10-CM/PCS codes, which impact payment, outcomes measurement (e.g., complications, mortality, and readmissions), and patient safety.
