Coding Challenge / E/M / modifier 25 / modifier 26 / radiology

Use 3 CPT, Modifier, and ICD-9 Code Pairs to Ace This X-Ray Claim

Decipher why you should include a seconding diagnosis.

Question: A 38-year-old patient presents to the emergency room with complaints of wheezing, coughing, and trouble catching her breath. After the nonphysician practitioner (NPP) performs a problem-focused history, the physician performs a detailed history and exam and discovers focal ronchi. The physician orders a two-view chest x-ray to check for upper respiratory infection (URI) The chest x-ray results reveal acute URI, and the ronchi clears up upon reevaluation. The patient is treated with antibiotics. How should I code this scenario?

Answer:You’ll submit two of each for this claim: CPT codes, modifiers,and ICD-9 codes. On the claim, report the following:

  • 71020 (Radiologic examination, chest, 2 views, frontal and lateral) for the x-ray
  • Modifier 26 (Professional component) appended 71020 to show that you are coding for the physician’s services only
  • 99284 (Emergency department visit for the evaluation and management of a patient, which requires these 3 key components: A detailed history; A detailed examination;and Medical decision making of moderate complexity….) for the E/M
  • Modifier 25 (Significant, separately identifiable evaluation and management service by the same physician on the same day of the procedure or other service) appended to 99284 show that the E/M and the x-rays were separate services
  • 465.9 (Acute upper respiratory infections of multiple or unspecified sites; unspecified site) appended to 71020 and 99284 to represent the patient’s URI
  • 786.7 (Symptoms involving respiratory system and other chest symptoms; abnormal chest sounds) appended to 71020 and 99284 to represent the patient’s focal ronchi.

Secondary Dx decoded: Even though the focal ronchi cleared up on reexamination, you should still include 786.7 on the claim. It will help paint a more lucid portrait of the patient’s condition, and can only strengthen your medical necessity case for the chest-x-ray.

@ Part B Insider. Editor:...

Comments Off on Use 3 CPT, Modifier, and ICD-9 Code Pairs to Ace This X-Ray Claim
May 24, 2010
Audit / CMS / Oig / RAC / Toolkit

Recovery Audit Contractors: Know These RAC Fast Facts

RACs are just another tool in the government’s arsenal to collect improper payments.

You’ve got so many compliance acronyms flying at you every day that you may not be able to differentiate your RAC from the OIG. Know these quick facts about RACs to stay better informed.

  • Recovery audit contractors (RACs) detect and correct past improper payments so CMS and the MACs can prevent such problems in the future
  • RACs are hired as contractors by the government, and they can can collect “contingency fees,” which means that they get a percentage of the amount that they recover from providers who were paid inappropriately The maximum RAC lookback period is three years, and they cannot review claims paid prior to Oct. 1, 2007
  • Between 2005 and 2008, RACs involved in the original demonstration project recovered over $1.03 billion in Medicare improper payments, but referred only two cases of potential fraud to CMS, according to a February OIG report on the topic, which noted that “because RACs do not receive their contingency fees for cases they refer that are determined to be fraud, there may be a disincentive for RACs to refer potential cases of fraud.”
  • Unlike RACs, the OIG is a government entity. Although the OIG also performs reviews and audits and seeks improper payments, the OIG does not collect contingency fees.

For more on the RAC program, visit www.cms.gov/rac.

@ Part B Insider. Editor: Torrey Kim, CPC

Sign up for the upcoming live Webinar, You Can Use the Appeals Process Like a Pro, 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.

Comments Off on Recovery Audit Contractors: Know These RAC Fast Facts
May 24, 2010
Medicare / Oig / Provider News

Cost of Freezing Conversion Factor is Over $6 Billion — Just for 2010

Plus: The OIG recovered over $1.5 billion in fiscal year 2009, and is on the lookout to collect more.

With less than two weeks to go before Medicare payments once again threaten to decrease by 21 percent, a new report sheds light on the financial outcome of Congressional actions.

Although the 2010 Physician Fee Schedule originally included a conversion factor that would have been 21 percent lower than the 2009 level, practices haven’t felt that cut yet this year,because legislators have voted several times to freeze payments, which now use the conversion factor of $36.0791. That freeze will expire on May 31, after which your Medicare payments will drop considerably unless Congress steps in once more.

However, one government entity’s calculations show that the freeze is costly. According to a May 7 Congressional Budget Office report, freezing payments at the current levels for the rest of 2010 would cost the government… … $6.5 billion. The AMA has turned up the heat on Congress to replace the current payment method, releasing a print ad aimed at Congress to demonstrate that “more delays of permanent reform now increase the cost for taxpayers,” and that the association “calls on Congress to fix the flawed Medicare physician payment formula now.”

Congress has not yet introduced a bill to extend the payment freeze past May 31. Keep an eye on the Insider for more information as this story develops.

To read the Congressional Budget Office’s calculation sheet,visit www.cbo.gov/budget/factsheets/2010b/SGR-menu.pdf.

@ Part B Insider. Editor: Torrey Kim, CPC

Sign up for the upcoming on-demand Webinar, 5 Steps to Optimize Your Office’s Coding & Billing Practices, 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.

Comments Off on Cost of Freezing Conversion Factor is Over $6 Billion — Just for 2010
May 24, 2010