Hot Coding Topics / Provider News

96446 And Dozen Others Join The List of CCI Edits

Effective Jan. 1, 2011, new CPT codes and, inevitably, new Correct Coding Initiative (CCI) physician edits are there for physicians. For version 17.0, “19,822 new edit pairs have been added to the database while 9,778 have been terminated, for a net gain of 10,044 new edit pairs,” according to Frank Cohen, MPA, MBB, of the Frank Cohen Group, in his Dec. 14, 2010, “NCCI Version 17.0 Change Analysis” announcement.

The main edits you want to be sure to watch for are those related to new code 96446 (Chemotherapy administration to the peritoneal cavity via indwelling port or catheter).

The 96446 non-mutually exclusive (NME) edits are largely what you would expect based on other chemotherapy code edits — bundles with E/M, anesthesia, venipuncture and other vascular procedures, for example. You want to be sure to watch which is the column 1 code and which is the column 2 code for these bundles.

CCI places E/M codes 99217-99239 in the column 1 position and 96446 in the column 2 position. On the other hand, CCI places 96446 in the column 1 position and E/M codes 99201-99215 in the column 2 position, as shown below:

Column 1 Column 2
99217-99239 96446
96446 99201-99215

Remember that if you report both codes in an NME edit pair without a modifier, Medicare (and payers who adopt these edits) will deny the column 2 code and pay you only for the column 1 code. The edits in the table above all have a modifier indicator of 1, meaning that you may override the edits with a modifier when appropriate, such as in the case of distinct,...

Comments Off on 96446 And Dozen Others Join The List of CCI Edits
January 17, 2011
Coding Challenge / Hot Coding Topics

Primary vs. Secondary Diagnosis

Question: Many of our ophthalmology patients claim general reasons for their visit, such as “I can’t see well,” or “My vision is foggy.” We code these visits with 368.8 as the primary diagnosis because this is the primary reason for the visit. Any other problems or underlying causes of the blurry vision we report as secondary diagnoses. Is 368.8 the most appropriate code to use in these situations, and should we list it first?

Answer: You should only report 368.8 (Other specified visual disturbances) as a primary diagnosis code when the ophthalmologist doesn’t find a more definitive diagnosis during the course of the visit.

Carriers often consider a visit for blurred vision the same thing as a routine exam— and Medicare will not pay for this service.

Primary vs. secondary: Whenever possible, you should list a more definitive diagnosis as primary and then the patient’s complaint of blurred vision as secondary. For example, if the ophthalmologist discovers that a cataract is causing the patient’s blurry vision, you would first list 366.12 (Incipient cataract) and then 368.8. You should always strive to report the most descriptive and accurate ICD-9 codes possible. If a patient claims her only reason for the visit is a routine exam, experts recommend that the ophthalmologist ask her a series of detailed questions to uncover any other complaints she may have but doesn’t think of right away. In obtaining a comprehensive history when a patient denies any blurriness of vision, the ophthalmologist should also ask, “Do your eyes chronically itch, burn, or water?” This may lead you to report dry eye syndrome (375.15, Tear film insufficiency, unspecified) or allergic conjunctivitis (372.14, Other chronic allergic conjunctivitis).

Do this: Rather than ask if a patient’s vision is blurry, ask if there is...

Comments Off on Primary vs. Secondary Diagnosis
January 3, 2011
Hot Coding Topics

Flu Vaccines: Replace 90658 by new Q codes

Your vaccine coding in 2011 will be anything but dull, thanks to changes in codes and administration reporting. Two more updates every FP should know involve new Q codes for some Medicare flu vaccines and expanded ages for adolescent vaccine counseling.

Nix 90658 in 2011

CMS has created new HCPCS codes and payment allowances to replace 90658 (Influenza virus vaccine, split virus, when administered to individuals 3 years of age and older, for intramuscular use). Medicare will no longer pay for 90658 effective Jan. 1, 2011, so choose from the new codes instead, based on the specific product:

  • Q2035 — Influenza virus vaccine, split virus, when administered to individuals 3 years of age and older, for intramuscular use (Afluria)
  • Q2036 — Influenza virus vaccine, split virus, when administered to individuals 3 years of age and older, for intramuscular use (Flulaval)
  • Q2037 — Influenza virus vaccine, split virus, when administered to individuals 3 years of age and older, for intramuscular use (Fluvirin)
  • Q2038 — Influenza virus vaccine, split virus, when administered to individuals 3 years of age and older, for intramuscular use (Fluzone)
  • Q2039 — Influenza virus vaccine, split virus, when administered to individuals 3 years of age and older, for intramuscular use (not otherwise specified).

Timing: Codes Q2035-Q2039 went into effect Oct. 1, 2010. You have two choices when filing claims for dates of service from Oct. 1, 2010 until Dec. 31, 2010: bill Medicare immediately with 90658, or hold the claim until Jan. 1, 2011 and file with the appropriate Q code. For vaccines administered after Jan. 1, 2011, only report the applicable Q code.

Explanation: Medicare pays for influenza vaccine based on 95 percent of the average wholesale price. “The products normally classifiable to 90658 have widely varying AWPs,” says Kent J. Moore, manager of...

Comments Off on Flu Vaccines: Replace 90658 by new Q codes
December 15, 2010
Hot Coding Topics / Medicare / Provider News

Replace 90658 With a Q Code, After Jan. 1

Get ready to change your flu vaccine product code 90658 to one of four Q codes. For 2010, report 90658 (Influenza virus vaccine, split virus, when administered to individuals 3 years of age and older, for intramuscular use) to signify that your physici...

Comments Off on Replace 90658 With a Q Code, After Jan. 1
December 8, 2010
2011 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule / CPT 2011 / CPT and RBRVS Annual Symposium / Hot Coding Topics

Peds Win Per Component Vaccine Admin Codes, Lose Requested PE RVUs

Pediatricians who were thrilled with CPT 2011’s move to paying vaccines per component got a setback from Medicare’s rejection of the recommended RVUs for new vaccine administration codes 90460 and 90461.

The Relative Update Committe recommended that the 2011 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule and Resource Based Relative Value Scale assign 0.20 practice expense (PE) RVUs to 90460 and 0.16 PE RVUs to 90461. But CMS disagreed with the proposal. “We disagree with the recommendations and will maintain 0.17 RVUs for code 90460 and 0.15 RVUs for code 90461 since these codes would be billed on a per toxoid basis,” said Kenneth Simon, MD, MBA, Senior Medical Officer, Center for Medicare and AMA CPT Editorial Panel Member, in “Medicare Physician Payment Schedule 2011 Changes and Beyond” at the CPT® and RBRVS 2011 Annual Symposium on Nov. 10, 2010.

The increased PEs represent an increase in RVUs from the 2010 values for comparable codes 90465/90467 and 90466/90468. The RUC requested the increase in value due to increased time for patient education. Since the new codes are valued per component, CMS felt no increase was warranted.

CMS assigned RVUs to 90460 and 90461 by crosswalking them with the values of the noncounseling vaccine administration codes 90471 and 90472. This means that new code 90460 has the same RVUs as 90471, and each unit of 90461 has the same RVUs as 90472.

The work and total RVUs for the codes include:

<td width="203"
Code PE  RVU  RUC Proposed PE  RVU MPFS Accepted Total RVUs
90460 0.20 0.17 0.59
90461 0.16 0.15 0.3
90465

...

Comments Off on Peds Win Per Component Vaccine Admin Codes, Lose Requested PE RVUs
November 29, 2010
Hot Coding Topics

Senate Stops Physician Payment Cuts

Physicians could feel a little looser on their spending thanks to a hold on the 2011 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule cut. On Nov. 18, the U.S. Senate unanimously consented to halt the Medicare planned conversion factor cut for a 31-day period. The U.S...

Comments Off on Senate Stops Physician Payment Cuts
November 23, 2010
Coding Challenge / modifier 25 / modifier 50 / modifier 51 / modifier 57 / modifier 59

No Correct Coding Initiative Bundle? Find Modifier Details in MPFS.

Question: Sometimes I cannot find my two-code pair in the CCI edits. How do I know which code would be considered a column 1 code and which would be considered a column 2 code, so that I could put my modifier on the correct code?

Answer: If the codes are not listed, the codes are not bundled per the Correct Coding Initiative (CCI). You would not need a CCI modifier, such as 25 (Significant, separately identifiable evaluation and management service by the same physician on  the same day of the procedure or other service), 57 (Decision for surgery), or 59 (Distinct procedural service), to override the edit when appropriate.

A private payer could have a black box edit. You would need to check with a rep for a recommendation.

Watch out: Just because a code does not have a bundle in CCI does not mean a modifier is out of the picture. While you won’t need a CCI modifier to override the edit, you might need apayment modifier.

You can find Medicare’s other allowed modifiers for any given CPT code in the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS). Columns Y-AC indicate if modifier 51 (Multiple procedure), 50 (Bilateral procedure), etc. apply.

To determine which code receives modifier 51, you need to know the code’s relative value units, which are also listed in the MPFS. Private payers may not adjust claim items in descending order as Medicare’s Outpatient Code Editor software does. If you append modifier 51 to a higher valued item, the private payer may apply the adjustment based on your coding, costing you payment. You should instead list the items in descending relative value order from highest to lowest. Append modifier 51 to the lower priced procedure as necessary. The insurer will then apply the typical 50 percent,...

Comments Off on No Correct Coding Initiative Bundle? Find Modifier Details in MPFS.
November 23, 2010
Toolkit

JCAAI 99211+95115: Appealing E/M With Allergy Injection Denials

March 21, 2007

Dear JCAAI Member:

We recently surveyed JCAAI members regarding reimbursement for an E&M service on the same day as a skin test or on the same day as an injection (95115 – 95117). Well over 80% are paid for an E&M service on the same day as a skin test. Far fewer are paid for an E&M service on the same day as an injection. In particular, the majority of allergists reported that they were not paid for an injection on the same day they billed a minimal office visit (99211).

Under Medicare policy, neither the injections codes nor the skin testing codes have global periods. Codes that have global periods (typically procedure codes) usually cannot be billed with an office visit because the E & M service is considered bundled into the procedure. Codes that do not have global periods do not include any bundling of E & M services; thus, coding policy generally permits them to be billed on the same day as an E & M without the use of modifier-25. However, as our survey results indicate, not all payers are aware of or are following this policy. This may be because, until January 1, 2006, the injection codes were classified as global period codes (which meant that they could not be billed with an E & M service without the use of modifier-25). JCAAI was successful in getting Medicare to change this so that you are allowed to bill an E & M service (including 99211) with allergy injection codes without meeting the requirements for modifier-25. The primary reason for this change was to allow a physician to bill 99211 when dealing with clinical issues surrounding allergy injection administration (e.g., directing a nurse giving injections as to what the nurse should do if...

Comments Off on JCAAI 99211+95115: Appealing E/M With Allergy Injection Denials
November 23, 2010
CPT 2011 / Provider News

95992: CRP Code Wins Payable Status

Medicare still won’t reimburse audiologist-billed Epley. After two years of battles with CMS over canalith repositioning procedure (CRP) coding, physicians will finally get paid for these specific codes. CPT® 2009 excited ENT coders with new CPT cod...

Comments Off on 95992: CRP Code Wins Payable Status
November 14, 2010