Coding Strategy

Plus: CMS has proposed freezing the ICD-9 codeset after next year.

If you were hoping that the Oct. 1, 2013 ICD-10 implementation date wasn’t set in stone, you are out of luck. That’s the word from CMS during a June 15 CMS Open Door Forum entitled “ICD-10 Implementation in a 5010 Environment.”

“There will be no delays on this implementation period, and no grace period,” said Pat Brooks, RHIA, with CMS’s Hospital and Ambulatory Policy Group, during the call. “A number of you have contacted us about rumors you’ve heard about postponement of that date or changes to that date, but I can assure you that that is a firm implementation date,” she stressed.

Brooks indicated that the rumor about a potential delay in the implementation date continues to persist throughout the physician community, and recommended that practice managers alert their physicians to the fact that that the rumor is untrue.

The Oct. 1, 2013 date will be in effect for both inpatient and outpatient services. Keep in mind that the ICD-10 implementation will have no impact on CPT and HCPCS coding, Brooks said. You will still continue to bill your CPT and HCPCS procedure codes as before.

You’ll Find Nearly 55,000 Additional Codes

Currently, CMS publishes about 14,000 ICD-9 codes, but there are over 69,000 ICD-10 codes. The additional codes will allow you to provide greater detail in describing diagnoses and procedures, Brooks said.

If you’re wondering which specific codes ICD-10 includes for your specialty, you can check out the entire 2010 ICD-10 codeset, which CMS has posted on its Web site. “Later this year, we’ll be posting the 2011 update,” Brooks said during the call.

@ For more details on CMS’ upcoming plans, subscribe to Part B Insider (Editor: Torrey Kim, CPC).

Sign up for the upcoming live audio conference, Risk Management Strategies for Healthcare Providers, or order the CD/transcripts.

Be a hero. Sign up for Supercoder.com, and join the coding community at the Supercoder.com Facebook Fan Page.

If the doctor does not circle a diagnosis, it may be up to you to find one.

Don’t let an incomplete superbill damage your chances of submitting an accurate claim. If the doctor in your office fails to indicate the ICD-9 code for the condition that he treated, you should read through his documentation to find which diagnoses you should report.

Open the Notes When You Have to — and Even When You Don’t

Suppose your physician hands you a superbill with the procedures circled and the diagnosis left blank.

You could ask the physician which diagnosis to report, or you could examine the documentation yourself. If your office has a policy that includes “coding by abstraction” by certified/qualified coders, then submitting charges based on what is supported (documented) in the note is appropriate, says Barbara J. Cobuzzi, MBA, CPC, CPCH,CPC-P, CENTC, CHCC, with CRN Healthcare Solutions in Tinton Falls, N.J. The physician should be signing off on these charges as part of your internal policy.

Some practices choose to review the documentation and compare it against any diagnoses recorded on the superbill, even when they aren’t required to. This ensures that the documentation matches the code selection every time.

When in Doubt, Confirm With the Physician

If you are new at coding diagnoses from the physician’s notes, you should doublecheck your code selections with the practitioners before submitting your claims.

“Until a coder feels comfortable with the ICD-9 books and the codes used more often in their office, it’s a good idea to run the choices by a clinician,” says Suzan Berman, CPC, CEMC, CEDC, senior manager of coding and compliance with the Physician Services Division of UPMC in Pittsburgh. “You never want to give a patient a disease or symptom they don’t have  ” or one more severe (or less) than what they have. This is also beneficial to the physicians, as if you select unspecified codes a lot they may learn how to better document the patient’s condition into their notes.”

Tip: Make sure your office creates a policy in writing that spells out what you should do when you encounter a superbill with no diagnosis listed. Some physicians prefer that you ask them for information, while most others rely on their coders to select an accurate code.

Check the Notes for Clues

Consider this example of a situation in which the coder must fill in the gap when the doctor has not written a diagnosis on the patient’s superbill.

Example: The physician’s superbill shows a level-three office visit with a patient wearing a lumbar orthosis. It also shows a date of injury of three days prior to the date of service and is missing the diagnosis code.

First step: You refer to the dictation, which reads: “The patient is a 13-year-old female being evaluated as a consultation at the request of Dr. Jones for lumbar pain. The low back pain started on 12-9-09 when she did splits during cheerleading.” The physician completes the remaining history, review of systems (ROS), past family and social history (PFSH), and exam.

Moving down through the chart note, you see that the patient brought an MRI and x-ray with her, which demonstrated a hairline fracture to the patient’s third lumbar vertebra (L3).

Under a separate heading, the doctor has given his assessment, which states: Closed L3 fracture, benign.

Next step: You look up “fracture” in Vol. 2 of the ICD-9 book and the most specific body area listed is “vertebra, lumbar (closed),” which is 805.4 (Fracture of vertebral column without mention of spinal cord injury; lumbar, closed).

You turn to Vol. 1 and read the information under the “fracture of vertebral column” heading to check for exclusions and see that none apply in this case. You search under 805.4 to see if by chance the book lists codes for benign or traumatic fractures, which it does not.

In addition, ICD-9 does not instruct you to add a fifth digit to 805.4. Therefore, you know that 805.4 is the most accurate code for your doctor’s visit.

@ Part B Insider (Editor: Torrey Kim, CPC).

Sign up for the upcoming live audio conference, Risk Management Strategies for Healthcare Providers, or order the CD/transcripts.

Be a hero. Sign up for Supercoder.com, and join the coding community at the Supercoder.com Facebook Fan Page.

The reason your patient is visiting is key.

Question: We have a patient who came in for a routine eye exam, but reported retinal damage from a BB-gun incident six years ago. What would be the best way to code this? This is a new patient, and I do not have any old records.

Answer: Unless the BB-gun injury six years ago has something to do with why the patient is there, it may not have any bearing on your coding. The diagnosis code always depends on the reason for the visit. If the patient decided to see an optometrist because of eye pain, eye pain (379.91, Pain in or around eye) — or whatever the optometrist found that was causing the pain — would be the diagnosis. If the eye pain is indeed the late effect of the BB-gun injury, you could report 906.0 (Late effect of open wound of head, neck and trunk) as a secondary diagnosis.

“When reporting late effects of an acute injury,” instruct the ICD-9 guidelines, “code the residual problem/condition as the primary diagnosis and record the appropriate late effects code as a secondary diagnosis.” In the above example, 379.91 would be the primary diagnosis, and 906.0 would be the secondary diagnosis.

However: If this was truly a routine exam, and the patient denies any current complaints, you would have to use V72.0 (Examination of eyes and vision) as the diagnosis. Unless the patient has vision insurance that covers routine exams, most carriers won’t reimburse you for this visit.

@ Ophthalmology Coding Alert (Editor: Jerry Salley, CPC).

Sign up for the upcoming live audio conference, Risk Management Strategies for Healthcare Providers, or order the CD/transcripts.

Be a hero. Sign up for Supercoder.com, and join the coding community at the Supercoder.com Facebook Fan Page.

From head to toe, the new diagnosis codes hold something for everyone.

Whether your patients present with cardiologic, orthopedic, or gynecologic complaints, the next round of ICD-9 codes could hold important changes for you. Here’s the rundown on the new codes most relevant to radiologists — including a new option for retained magnetic metal fragments.

Remember: ICD-9 2011 will go into effect Oct. 1, 2010. The official version will be released in the fall, so the codes below are not yet final.

1. Look Forward to More Specific Ectasia Codes

The proposed changes to ICD-9 2011 add four codes specific to aortic ectasia. These codes are among the most significant changes for radiology coders because you may see that term in your radiologist’s findings, says Helen L. Avery, CPC, CHC, CPC-I, manager of revenue cycle services for Los Angeles-based Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting Inc. “Ectasia” means dilation or enlargement, and aortic ectasia typically refers to enlargement that is milder than an aneurysm. But ICD-9 2010 does not distinguish ectasia from aneurysm, indexing aortic ectasia to 441.9 (Aortic aneurysm of unspecified site without mention of rupture) and 441.5 (Aortic aneurysm of unspecified site, ruptured).

The proposed 2011 codes are specific to aortic ectasia and differ based on anatomic site:

• 447.70 — Aortic ectasia, unspecified site
• 447.71 — Thoracic aortic ectasia
• 447.72 — Abdominal aortic ectasia
• 447.73 — Thoracoabdominal aortic ectasia.

2. Watch for ‘Claudication’ in Stenosis Report

Another one of the important changes is the proposed addition of 724.03 (Spinal stenosis, lumbar region, with neurogenic claudication), says Avery. The code refers to lumbar spinal stenosis, which is a narrowing of the spinal canal, according to the Sept. 16-17, 2009, ICD-9-CM Coordination and Maintenance Committee meeting proposal (available here). Neurogenic claudication “is a commonly used term for a syndrome associated with significant lumbar spinal stenosis leading to compression of the cauda equina (lumbar nerves),” the proposal states.

ICD-9 2010 includes 724.02 (Spinal stenosis, other than cervical; lumbar region). Andelle Teng, MD, a spine and orthopedic surgeon in Washington, requested a code addition to differentiate patients with and without neurogenic claudication because “with” is a possible surgical condition. The 2011 proposal revises 724.02 to “Spinal stenosis, lumbar region, without neurogenic claudication,” in contrast to the 724.03 proposal for patients with claudication.

3. Match New Uterine Codes to Clinical Class

If you code gynecological imaging, don’t miss the proposed new codes for uterine abnormalities. So-called müllerian duct abnormalities can cause infertility, but surgical correction is sometimes possible. Radiological imaging, usually MRI, confirms the diagnosis, so the radiologist should document the specific type of abnormality in his findings, Avery says. The ICD-9 2011 proposal expands the 752.3 (Other anomalies of uterus) range:

• 752.31 — Agenesis of uterus
• 752.32 — Hypoplasia of uterus
• 752.33 — Unicornuate uterus
• 752.34 — Bicornuate uterus
• 752.35 — Septate uterus
• 752.36 — Arcuate uterus
• 752.39 — Other anomalies of uterus.

Bonus tool: Avery reveals how the ICD-9 2011 proposal matches to the müllerian duct abnormality classifications:

Watch for: You’ll also find proposed expansion of 752.4x (Anomalies of cervix, vagina, and external female genitalia):

• 752.43 — Cervical agenesis
• 752.44 — Cervical duplication
• 752.45 — Vaginal agenesis
• 752.46 — Transverse vaginal septum
• 752.47 — Longitudinal vaginal septum.

4. Review New Retained Fragment Proposals

Over one-third of the proposed codes are “V” codes, which describe “supplementary classification of factors influencing health status and contact with health services,” according to the ICD-9 manual. A number of the codes describe retained fragments, which the radiologist may note in his findings, Avery says.

For instance: For retained metal fragments, you would choose among the following:

• V90.10 — Retained metal fragments, unspecified
• V90.11 — Retained magnetic metal fragments
• V90.12 — Retained nonmagnetic metal fragments.

The Department of Defense requested codes to help identify retained objects resulting from explosion injuries, but the codes could prove useful in other cases, as well. For example, an embedded magnetic object (V90.11) is a contraindication to an MRI exam.

Resource: CMS posted the proposed codes as part of the Inpatient Proposed Payment System, available online here. To review the codes, download “Proposed Tables 6A-6K.” Table 6A includes proposed new codes, 6C shows the proposed deletions, and 6E lists proposed revisions.

@ Radiology Coding Alert (Editor: Deborah Dorton, JD, MA, CPC).

Be a hero. Sign up for Supercoder.com, and join the coding community at the Supercoder.com Facebook Fan Page.

These edits took effect April 1, so start observing them yesterday.

The latest version of the Correct Coding Initiative (CCI) has an edit that family practice coders should note – especially if the practice treats newborn patients.

Get to know the new CCI 16.1 edit and get ready to observe it with this expert breakdown. Check Column 1 on These Hospital E/Ms According to CCI 16.1, these codes are in column 1 of the mutually exclusive edits:

• 99231 (Subsequent hospital care, per day, for the evaluation and management of a patient, which requires at least 2 of these 3 key components: a problem focused interval history; a problem focused examination; medical decision making that is straightforward or of low complexity …)
• 99232 (… an expanded problem focused interval history; an expanded problem focused examination; medical decision making of moderate complexity …)
• 99233 (… a detailed interval history; a detailed examination; medical decision making of high complexity …).

Column 2 of these edits includes these codes:

• 99460 (Initial hospital or birthing center care, per day,for evaluation and management of normal newborn infant)
• 99461 (Initial care, per day, for evaluation and management of normal newborn infant seen in other than hospital or birthing center)
• 99462 (Subsequent hospital care, per day. for evaluation and management of normal newborn).

Translation: An FP may not report both normal newborn care and subsequent hospital care for a newborn on the same date of service. If the FP performs normal newborn services (99460-99462) on the same date that the newborn later becomes ill and receives subsequent hospital care (99231-99233), you should only report a code from the 99231-99233 code set, explains Kent Moore, manager of health care financing and delivery systems for the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) in Leawood, Kan.

The services are mutually exclusive because the newborn care codes (99460-99463) are for “normal” newborns (i.e., newborns without medical problems); whereas the subsequent hospital care codes (99231-99233) are for problem-oriented services, Moore says.

Since both sets of services are designated as “per day,”coders must choose between them for a given patient on a given date. “Consistent with the mutually exclusive nature of these services, CCI does not permit a modifier to override the edits,” Moore continues.

Bottom line: Never report 99460-99262 and 99231-99233 for the same patient on the same date of service.

@ Family Practice Coding Alert. Editor: Chris Boucher, CPC

Sign up for the upcoming live audio conference, Modifier 59 and NCCI Edits, or order the CD/transcripts.

Be a hero. Sign up for Supercoder.com, and join the coding community at the Supercoder.com Facebook Fan Page.