1 conus coding validation march 2002 – august 2002 september 24, 2002
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
CONUS CODING VALIDATION
March 2002 – August 2002
September 24, 2002
![Page 2: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
VALIDATION SITES
• Air Force 25
• Navy 8
• Army 17
• Total 50
![Page 3: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Cases Provided/Not Provided
![Page 4: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Database Case Selection
![Page 5: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Comparative Analysis
5
![Page 6: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Comparative Analysis
![Page 7: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Comparative Analysis
![Page 8: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Primary Reasons For Disagreement
• Primary Diagnosis– Diagnosis not accurate/not supported
• Secondary Diagnoses– Diagnosis not reported
• CPT/HCPCS– Procedure not reported
• E/M– Documentation supported a lower level E/M code than
was reported in the database
![Page 9: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Precision
• Are all codes coded as specifically as they could be?
![Page 10: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Precision
![Page 11: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Depth
• Are all complexities and comorbidities coded?
![Page 12: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Depth
![Page 13: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Compliance
• Is encounter procedure and/or E/M codes– Overcoded/Overbilled– Undercoded/Underbilled
![Page 14: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Compliance Procedures
![Page 15: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Compliance E/M
![Page 16: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
General Comments
• Documentation of key components (history, examination and medical decision-making) not present
• Seventeen (17) percent of the medical records provided did not contain documentation for the services reported in the database
• Documentation not dated or identified by MEPRS code
• Documentation not legible• Unavailability of records
![Page 17: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
AREAS OF CONCERN
• Diagnosis– Principal diagnosis not reason for encounter– Secondary diagnosis not reported– Non-compliance ICD-9-CM coding guidelines
• Specificity• Probable, possible, rule-out• Counseling codes
• CPT Procedure/HCPCS– Not reported– Not supported by documentation
![Page 18: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
AREAS OF CONCERN
• E/M– Overcoding/Undercoding
• Documentation
– Non-compliance ADM Coding Guidelines
– New vs. Established
– Referrals vs. Consultations
– Preventive Medicine vs. Office Codes
– Number of records requested/received/reviewed/no documentation
![Page 19: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
Coding Quality Program
• Impact of inaccurate data– Reimbursement– Research– Statistics– Planning – Compliance
![Page 20: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
Steps to Coding Compliance
• Administrative buy-in
• Coding quality – Tools– Program– Analyst– Internal/External Audits– Continuing Education
![Page 21: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
Recommendations
• Documentation– Improves coding accuracy– Compliance efforts lead to process improvement
• Education– Outpatient coding guidelines for reporting diagnoses
and procedures– New vs. Established patient based on MEPRS code– Documenting the patient history, level of physical
examination and type of medical decision-making provided during the encounter
![Page 22: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
Recommendations (Continued)
– Determining when consultation E/M code should be assigned
– Determining when Preventive Medicine Services should be assigned
![Page 23: 1 CONUS CODING VALIDATION March 2002 – August 2002 September 24, 2002](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062309/5697bfd91a28abf838caf77b/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
Recommendations (Continued)
• Orientation and training
• Audit– Internal/External
• Review payer denials
• Round table discussions