Pediatric and family practice coders are all too familiar with ADD-like complaints minus a definitive diagnosis. ICD-9 2011 holds the key to alternative options until further testing is complete.
ICD-9 2011 adds the 799.5x family to the “Ill Defined …
Question: We have always reported A4556 for the electrodes our urologist uses during urodynamics procedures. This year, however, DMERC has refused reimbursement, stating we should instead be using code A4595 or A4557. Those two “replacement” code…
Eliminate ‘uncertain behavior’ confusion with expert tips
If you always use diagnosis code 238.2 (Neoplasm of uncertain behavior of skin) when you’re reporting 11100 (Biopsy of skin, subcutaneous tissue and/or mucous membrane [including simple closure], unless otherwise listed; single lesion) for a biopsy procedure your surgeon performs, you’re setting your practice up for disaster. The key to knowing when to use the “uncertain behavior” diagnosis code is understanding what that code descriptor really means. Follow these expert tips to ensure you’re choosing the correct diagnosis code for all your 11100 claims.
Wait For Pathology Before Choosing a Code
When your general surgeon performs a biopsy you should always wait until the pathology report comes back to choose the proper diagnosis and procedure codes to report – even though this will not always affect the CPT code you will wind up choosing.
Reason: The biopsy specimen’s pathology will affect the ICD-9 code you report, but most CPT procedure codes are not based on the specimen’s results. “There are a few CPT codes which are linked to specific diagnoses (for instance, excision of benign and malignant lesions), but overall CPT is about what you did; ICD-9 is about the outcome or the reason for it,” says Marcella Bucknam, CPC, CCS-P, CPC-H, CCS, CPC-P, COBGC, CCC, manager of compliance education for the University of Washington Physicians Compliance Program in Seattle.
Get to Know the Meaning Behind ‘Uncertain’ Codes
When you report 238.2 as the diagnosis for a biopsy procedure, you’re telling the payer that the pathologist said in his path report that he was uncertain as to the morphology of the lesion, says Barbara J. Cobuzzi, MBA, CPC, CENTC, CPC-H, CPC-P, CPC-I, CHCC, president of CRN Healthcare Solutions, a coding and reimbursement consulting firm in Tinton Falls, N.J., and senior coder and auditor for…
Three scenarios show you where to brush up before Oct. 1 hits.
October 1 means it’s time to apply the new 2011 diagnosis codes affecting your obgyn practice, which include new uterine anomaly, placenta, and personal history diagnoses. Are you ready? Take this challenge to find out.
Add Uterine Anomalies to Your Diagnosis Arsenal
Scenario 1:
A) 752.31
B) 752.33
C) 752.35
D) None of the above.
E) All of the above.
Solution 1: E. The American Society of Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) identified seven types of uterine anomalies: agenesis, unicornuate, didelphus, bicornuate, septate, arcuate, and DES related anomalies. Of these, only didelphus and DES related anomalies have unique ICD-9 codes prior to Oct. 1: 752.2 and 760.76, respectively. For the other anomalies, you have no specific diagnosis recourse.
However, as of Oct. 1, you’ll be able to differentiate between these different types, and payers will translate these codes into specific gynecologic and obstetric implications and management. They are:
Multiple Placentae? Make Use of New Dx
Scenario 2: The ob-gyn delivers dichorionic/diamniotic twins vaginally. After October 1, how should you report this?
A) 59400, 59409-51, 651.01, V91.00, V27.2
B) 59400, 59409-51, 651.01, V91.01, V27.2
C) 59400, 59409-51, 651.01, V91.02, V27.2
D) 59400, 59409-51, 651.01, V91.03, V27.2
E) 59400, 59409-51, 651.01, V91.09, V27.2
Solution 2: D. You would report 59400 (Routine obstetric care including antepartum care, vaginal delivery [with or without episiotomy, and/or forceps] and postpartum care) for the first baby and 59409-51 (Vaginal delivery only [with or without episiotomy and/or forceps]; Multiple procedures) for the second. To support these CPT codes, you’d link each to 651.01 (Twin pregnancy; delivered) and…
Agencies will have little control over new physician-related payment condition. Home health agencies are hoping for some big changes to one troublesome provision in the 2011 proposed payment rule – the face-to-face physician encounter requirement.
The mandate for the face-to-face encounter was in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act health care reform law enacted earlier this year. But the CMS version of the requirement is even stricter than the law requires.
Example: The proposed rule also requires that the encounter be for the primary reason home care services are required and that physicians furnish “unprecedented” physician documentation about the encounter and why the patient meets homebound criteria. “We believe that CMS has gone beyond statutory intent” in those two provisions, says the National Association for Home Care & Hospice.
The proposed face-to-face encounter requirement is riddled with problems for HHAs, industry experts say. To begin with, agencies have little influence over whether their patients make it to the doctor for a visit.
“It is absolutely ridiculous to place a requirement on home health providers for which they have absolutely no control,” protests consultant Pam Warmack with Clinic Connections in Ruston, La. “How in the world is the staff of the home health provider supposed to ensure that the patient visits the physician and that the physician documents appropriately in his/her office records?” Warmack asks.
“We can make appointments for patients, but we can’t ensure they keep them, that their transportation is reliable, that they feel well enough to make the trip, etc.,” Warmack continues. “There are so, so many reasons that patients fail to see the physician despite the best efforts of the home care staff to make it happen.”
The requirement will be “a particular burden on home health patients who are homebound and have difficulty leaving home,” notes…