In our computer-savvy tech world, the medical field has been notoriously slow to respond to newer technologies and applications of computer-assisted enhancements. However, in the HIM market, computer-assisted coding (CAC) has been touted to boost coding accuracy and productivity, in addition to being an important tool for the remote inpatient coder.
Shannon E. McCall, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPC, CPC-I, CEMC, CRC, CCDS, continues her review of the updated 2017 ICD-10-CM guidelines by explaining how changes to sections for laterality and non-provider documentation will impact coders and physicians. Note: To access this free article, make sure you first register here if you do not have a paid subscription. Once you have set up your free registration, you can log in and access this article by clicking here.
Shannon E. McCall, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P, CPC, CPC-I, CEMC, CRC, CCDS, delves into chapter-specific guidance included in the updated 2017 ICD-10-CM guidelines, including changes for diabetes, hypertension, pressure ulcers, and more.
As providers prepare for the thousands of new codes and updated guidelines to be implemented October 1, the ICD-10 Coordination and Maintenance Committee recently met to discuss the next batch of updates to be implemented October 1, 2017.
Q: We have a new pharmacy director and he wants to monitor all separately payable drugs to ensure that we receive appropriate reimbursement. We’re trying to figure out how to do this because the payment is subject to change each quarter. Do you have any suggestions?
Billing correctly for observation hours is a challenge for many organizations. Getting it right requires knowing how to calculate observation hours for each patient, which is far from straightforward. Janet L. Blondo, LCSW-C, MSW, CMAC, ACM, CCM, C-ASWCM, ACSW, writes about how to properly calculate hours and report observation services properly.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Sharme Brodie, RN, CCDS , discusses how to decipher between some potentially confusing—and possibly conflicting—information regarding diabetes documentation requirements.
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.
CMS proposes aligning its conditional packaging logic with how it applies packaging to labs, while also proposing to delete the much-maligned modifier -L1 for separately payable laboratory tests in 2017.
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.
CMS’ proposed changes to implement Section 603 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 would reshape payments for off-campus, provider-based departments (PBD) if finalized and represent the most significant changes in the calendar year (CY) 2017 OPPS proposed rule.
While the 2017 OPPS proposed rule includes a variety of tweaks and augmentations to existing regulations, its biggest impact is likely to come from its proposal to implement Section 603 provisions of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 regarding off-campus, provider-based departments (PBD) and move toward more site-neutral payment policies.
CMS released the fiscal year (FY) 2017 IPPS final rule August 2, and ICD-10-CM/PCS code changes and the addition of the Medicare Outpatient Observation Notice (MOON) both had starring roles. CMS also made changes to several quality initiatives and reversed the agency's 0.2% payment reduction instituted along with the 2-midnight rule first implemented in the FY 2014 rule.
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.
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.
Lori-Lynne A. Webb, CPC, CCS-P, CCP, CHDA, COBGC, CDIP , writes about how computer-assisted coding software can be used to boost coding accuracy and productivity, in addition to being an important tool for the remote coder.
A study conducted by Johns Hopkins Armstrong Institute for Patient Safety and Quality finds that common measures used by government agencies and public rankings to rate the safety of hospitals, such as the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s patient safety indicators, and hospital-acquired conditions, do not accurately capture the quality of care provided.
Q: During an ICD-10-PCS Fusion, when a physician documents the use of a “structural allograft spacer” in the medical record, what sixth character would we use when coding this? Some colleagues say to use A (interbody fusion) and some say to use K (nonautologous tissue substitute). What would be the correct way to code this?
Richard D. Pinson, MD, FACP, CCS , discusses the new Sepsis-3 definition and how the classification has been the subject of great controversy and consternation since its publication in The Journal of the American Medical Association.
Robert Stein, MD, CCDS, and Shannon Newell, RHIA, CCS, co-author this article that provides insights into how clinical documentation and reported codes may impact payments and offer guidance on some common CDI challenges to strengthening data quality. Note: To access this free article, make sure you first register if you do not have a paid subscription.
While coders can choose among many CPT codes, provider documentation may sometimes not differentiate between similar options. Lori-Lynne A. Webb, CPC, CCS-P, CCP, CHDA, COBGC, CDIP, writes about some tricky procedures to distinguish and how coders can ensure they’re reporting which procedures providers actually performed. Note: To access this free article, make sure you first register here if you do not have a paid subscription. Once you have set up your free registration, you can log in and access this article by clicking here.
Jugna Shah, MPH, and Valerie Rinkle, MPA, recap CMS’ proposed changes to packaging logic in the 2017 OPPS proposed rule, as well as plans for new and deleted modifiers.
CMS is proposing to replace status indicator E (services not paid, non-allowed item or service) with two more specific status indicators in the 2017 OPPS proposed rule. The agency proposes status indicator E1 for items and services not covered by Medicare and E2 for items and services for which pricing information or claims data are not available.
Q: Our surgeons perform a lot of blepharoptosis repairs. Because each patient is different, different amounts of eyelid tissue has to be removed. One of our surgeons wants to set a maximum amount that is included in the procedure and then charge a blepharoplasty to cover anything over and above this maximum. We are trying to figure out how to even start to operationalize this. It seems to us that this is just a “patient differential” in the surgery like you have in any other surgery. Is there any guidance or standard for this?
Debbie Mackaman, RHIA, CPCO, CCDS, reviews how CMS determines inpatient-only procedures and what changes the agency is considering in the 2017 OPPS proposed rule.
Q: What exactly are diagnostic-related groups (DRG) 067 and 068 (nonspecific cerebrovascular accident [CVA] and pre-cerebral occlusion without infarct, respectively)? How do they differ from transient ischemic attack (TIA) or CVA?
James Kennedy, MD, CCS, CDIP , offers his take on AHIMA’s recently published clinical validation practice brief. Given that AHIMA is one of the ICD-10 Cooperating Parties, their practice briefs must be read closely, and if agreeable, incorporated into one’s compliance plan. Note: To access this free article, make sure you first register if you do not have a paid subscription.
Shannon Newell, RHIA, CCS, writes about recently proposed modifications to Patient Safety Indicator 90, and how a fact sheet released by the measure's owner, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, provides insights into what changes may lie ahead.
CMS released the fiscal year 2017 IPPS final rule August 2. ICD-10-CM/PCS code changes and the addition of the Medicare Outpatient Observation Notice had a starring role in the final rule.
Deciphering documentation is frequently the most difficult aspect of coding. Lori-Lynne A. Webb, CPC, CCS-P, CCP, CHDA, COBGC, CDIP, writes about what documented information coders can use to assign codes—and what to do when that information is lacking.
Modifier -58 describes a staged or related procedure or service by the same provider during the postoperative period. For outpatient hospitals, the postoperative period is defined as the same service date.
CMS recently released a short guide aimed at teaching healthcare professionals how to use the Medicare National Correct Coding Initiative tools and the differences between types of edits.
Q: When our pharmacy mixes medications for infusion, they sometimes have to waste a part of the vial that was opened. They log this in the pharmacy log, which they keep in the department. We have been billing the full amount of the drug that was in the vial and have had no issues with getting paid. Our pharmacist came from a regional meeting and told us that this is going to change.
