Click here for more sample CPC practice exam questions with Full Rationale Answers

Practice Exam

Click here for more sample CPC practice exam questions and answers with full rationale

Practice Exam

CPC Practice Exam and Study Guide Package

Practice Exam

What makes a good CPC Practice Exam? Questions and Answers with Full Rationale

CPC Exam Review Video

Laureen shows you her proprietary “Bubbling and Highlighting Technique”

Download your Free copy of my "Medical Coding From Home Ebook" at the top right corner of this page

Practice Exam

2018 CPC Practice Exam Answer Key 150 Questions With Full Rationale (HCPCS, ICD-9-CM, ICD-10, CPT Codes) Click here for more sample CPC practice exam questions with Full Rationale Answers

Practice Exam

Click here for more sample CPC practice exam questions and answers with full rationale

Lower extremity Angio help

This case has two docs on it and I’m kind of confused on where to start. Can someone help me with these codes?

Bilateral LE Angiography
Crossing of CTO R popliteal
CSI R SFA and R Popliteal
PTA R SFA, R Popliteal and R PT
L Femoral and R PT Access

INDICATIONS
Patient was referred for cardiac catheterization to assess the coronary anatomy . Indications for the procedure include: Severe life limiting claudication, with prior CTO PTA R popliteal, and two prior fem-pop and fem PT bypasses. Reocclusion of R popliteal with severe disease of R SFA and R PT and occlusion of R AT on CTA of LE.

Procedure Details
The risks, benefits, complications, treatment options, and expected outcomes were discussed with the patient. The patient and/or family concurred with the proposed plan, giving informed consent. Patient was brought to the cath lab after IV hydration was begun and oral premedication was given. Patient was further sedated with fentanyl and versed. Patient was prepped and draped in the usual manner. Using the modified Seldinger access technique, a 6 French sheath was placed in the left femoral artery. LLE angiogram was performed.

Initial Findings:
Mild bilateral iliac disease. Patent common femorals bilaterally.
Moderate disease involving L SFA and popliteal and infrapopliteal vessels.
Svere disease invilving ostial R SFA with multiple areas of severe disease inolving the mid and distal R SFA, CTO R popliteal and multiple sveere stenoses involving R PT. Occluded R AT with patent R peroneal.

Interventions:
Crossing of CTO R popliteal
CSI R SFA and R Popliteal
PTA R SFA, R Popliteal and R PT
L Femoral and R PT Access

Procedure:
PCI procedure:
A 6F LIMA catheter was used to get access to the right common iliac and using a 0.035 Stiff angled glide into the right SFA, the catheter was replaced with a long Terumo sheath the tip of which was lodged in the right common femoral artery. RLE angiography was performed which revealed:
Initial Findings:
Mild bilateral iliac disease. Patent common femorals bilaterally.
Moderate disease involving L SFA and popliteal and infrapopliteal vessels.
Svere disease invilving ostial R SFA with multiple areas of severe disease inolving the mid and distal R SFA, CTO R popliteal and multiple severe stenoses involving R PT. Occluded R AT with patent R peroneal.

At this point access was obtained from the right PT artery under US guidance using aa 6F sheath. A 0.018 Confienza wire was used to navigate the CTO popliteal without success. Using a Gold tip Glide wire and a Quickcross catheter, the popliteal artery was crossed the the wire was replaced with a Viper wire. The R SFA and popliteal arteries were treated with CSI atherectomy with multiple passes. Then, the R PT was treated with a 2.0-2.5 EV3 Nanocross Elite baloon with multiple inflations at up to 16 atm. The R SFA was treated with a 4.0x250mm Armada Balloon at 10 atm. The popliteal and distal SFA were treated with a Lutonix 4.0x150mm DE balloon at 6 atm. Finally the distal popliteal was treated with a 3.5×40 mm EV3 balloon at 6 atm.
Final angiography revealed evidence of < 40% residual stenosis with a slight linear intimal dissection distally with no limitation of flow. There popliteal artery had < 30% residual stenosis and the PT had < 40% residual stenosis and there was excellent flow along the vessel..
Before Poplital PTA was performed, The PT sheath was removed, and hemostrasis was achieved using local pressure.. Finally the left femoral sheath was sutured in place then removed after the ACT was < 150.

The final ACT was 210. Intracoronary nitroglycerin was given during the procedure the maximize distal runoff and our ability to measure vessel size. The patient tolerated the procedure and left the catheter lab in stable condition.

Estimated Blood Loss: less than 30 mL

Specimens Collected: None

Complications: None; patient tolerated the procedure well.

Disposition: PACU – hemodynamically stable

Condition: stable

Moderate conscious sedation was administered by a qualified nursing professional under Continuous hemodynamic monitoring starting at 8:12 AM , and ending at 10:30 AM
Total IV Fentanyl: 200 mcg
Total IV Versed: 4 mg
Nurse:

Impression:
S/P successful recanalization of R popliteal and PTA of R SFA, Popliteal and PT arteries.

Treatment:
ASA
Brilinta
Beta Blocker
ACE/ARB
Statins
Continue current medical therapy

Thank you so much for the help!

Medical Billing and Coding Forum

How to Lower Your Blood Pleasure Without Taking Medical Treatment

A common way for people with high blood pressure is taking medecines in order to control it. However, sometimes, these medecines are not enough strong to lower high blood pressure to normal levels. Lowering to healthy levels also needs some additional measures.

 

Prolonged and Uncontrolled high blood pressure can result in some serious complications like stroke, heart attack or even kidney failure. It is for this reason that you need to do everything you can to control it to normal levels.

 

We are listing some natural ways which could help you immensely to lower your BP and these are easy for you to include in your normal daily routine.

 

1. Have a piece of dark chocolate daily. As per the recent report on Hypertension in the Journal of AHA (American Heart Association), when a person eats small amounts of dark chocolates in daily routine, it contributes to some chemical changes in human body which contributes in dilation of blood vessels thus lowering blood pressure.

 

2. Potassium: It is a magic mineral. It is an important nutrient essential for maintaining electrolyte balance which regulates the muscle and heart’s contraction. It also helps maintain the fluid balance in the body.

 

You can get your daily requirements of potassium from foods like apples, avocados, bananas, oranges, pears, carrots, pears and sweet potatoes.

 

3. Water: It is the miracle medicine given by Mother Nature. When your body goes in the state of dehydration, your BP can shoot up dramatically. When body mechanism begins to retain water instead of allowing it a natural flow, the blood pressure could rise. This action of body is however preventive to save the body cells from dehydrating.

 

Make it a habit to drink good amounts of water daily. It will not only lower your blood pressure but would help to improve your other body functions.

 

4. Walking Is Good For You. Sedentary lifestyle is a bane and cause of many diseases. Over a period of time our inactivity could lead to lot’s of health complications in us. Regular exercise would help us in lowering our blood pressure. The good news is that you need not go for vigorous exercises but just moderate ones to achieve maximum gains.

 

A most recent study which was published in Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health informed us that just 35 minutes of daily walk just three days a week is all that is needed for good health and heart.

 

The above mentioned 4 ways are in fact simple and yet proven ones to lower your blood pressure. But maintaining consistency while practicing them is the only way to gain maximum benefit in long run. You should try making them a part of your daily routine to gain a healthy heart and a fully normal blood pressure.

 

Michael has been writing articles online for 10 years. Check out his latest website MTD Mower Parts which help people find more about MTD Belts.

Related Medical Coding Articles

Left lower lobectomy with bronchial / muscle flap repair

Looking for some advice on the following op report:

SALIENT OPERATIVE FINDINGS:
Bronchoscopy revealed tumor extending out of superior segment of
the lower lobe, but it did not protrude as high as the upper lobe.
We performed a VATS procedure. I was concerned that there would be
tumor spill. After some dissection with the VATS, we felt that
there would be potential for tumor spell and therefore we abandoned
this and went through the thoracotomy. At that point in time, we
divided all the vessels. We removed anterior 11 nodes in station
which are by frozen section negative. We also removed station 8
nodes and posterior 11 nodes and station 7 node #1 and station 7
node #2. However, when we came to divide the bronchus and the
bronchus staples, we noticed that the tumor was pushed up and I believe that the compression of the bronchus stapler caused the
nearest of the tumor to push into the margin we were to staple.
For this reason, I felt it appropriate not to do this and instrument I performed an open bronchotomy and I had
taken down an intercostal muscle flap in the fifth space, and I used
this to bolster my repair.
Estimated blood loss was 175 mL.

OPERATIVE NOTE:
The patient was brought to the operating room, underwent general
anesthesia, and single-lumen endotracheal intubation. A time-out
and a safety pause were then performed conforming to universal
protocol. The bronchoscope was then passed down the endotracheal
tube. We fully visualized all of the tracheobronchial tree. On the
right side, there were only 2 segments to the right upper lobe.
Bronchus intermedius was normal as was the lower lobe and middle
lobe. Primary carina was sharp.

Following that, we then passed the bronchoscope down the
endotracheal tube and into the airway. We could see the
secondary carina that was also sharp. Left upper lobe was normal.
There was an endobronchial tumor protruding out of the superior
segment to the right of the left lower lobe, but it was not so
large. It did not extend up to the area of the secondary
carina, but ended just distal to the secondary carina. This is
entirely compatible with endobronchial polypoid carcinoid tumor.
I felt we would be able to remove this with a lobectomy or
potentially even with superior segmentectomy.

Following that, we then removed the bronchoscope. We changed over
to a double-lumen tube. After this was done, we then turned the
patient, prepped and draped the chest in a normal fashion, and then
performed eighth intercostal space port incision. Through this, we
passed the thoracoscope and then in the fifth intercostal space, we
created an incision and accessed incision through these as well as
the fifth posterior port site, we started to take down the lung. We
identified anterior 11 nodes which were sent for frozen section, and
were negative. We could see that there was some bulk disease in the
superior segment of the lower lobe; however, due to compression
August tumor I was concerned about possible breaches of the pleura,
and subsequent tumor spill, therefore we then converted to an open
thoracotomy.

We then went to fifth intercostal serratus sparing posterolateral
thoracotomy, we took down the fifth intercostal bundle as a
vascularized pedicle. This was then kept for subsequent repair.
After this was done,and after we had entered the chest we then
mobilized the pulmonary artery and divided it with the endovascular
stapler. We did identify posterior 11 nodes as well as station 7
nodes 1 and 2. They were sent for frozen section and were negative
for tumor.

After that was
1done, we then divided the inferior pulmonary vein after confirming
that we had not impaired the venous drainage of the superior pulmonary vein, that we did this. We then came to the bronchus, we
passed the bronchus stapler across the left lower lobe bronchus
after removing all nodes from around the bronchus, but compression
of this caused tumor to peep up and we stapled tumor into our
bronchus margin. I, therefore, then stopped, took the staples off
and then performed an open bronchotomy. This way, we had adequate
margin as assessed by frozen section and this did look like a
carcinoid tumor or neuroendocrine tumor. After that was done, we
then repaired the bronchus with an interrupted 4-0 PDS sutures. We
also then placed our intercostal muscle flap on the bronchus stump
to bolster the repair.
There was no air leak thereafter. We
irrigated out the chest with water to lyse any cells. We then
inserted 2 On-Q catheters for postop drainage. We placed a buried
24-French chest tube through the port site. We then closed the
chest with #1 PDS figure-of-eight pericostal sutures, #1 PDS to the
muscle layers, 2-0 Vicryl to the subcutaneous tissue, and 4-0
Monocryl and Dermabond to the skin.
———————————————————————
-The areas in bold are where I’m getting hung up. The use of an intercostal muscle flap suggests I should use 15734 in addition to my lobectomy code (32480). However, I’m wondering if 32501 is also warranted here? CPT guidelines for 32501 state it is "to be used when a portion of the bronchus to preserved lung is removed and requires plastic closure to preserve function of that lung. It is not to be used for closure of the proximal end of a resected bronchus." I’m not sure if just the closure is what is being described here? Would this just be included in 32480? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks in advance. (P.S., I do know that I also have to add 38746 for the mediastinal lymph node dissections)

Medical Billing and Coding Forum

Lower Readmission Rates in Hospitals in Value-based Programs

Facilities participating in voluntary value-based programs have fewer readmissions than those not-involved, according to a study in AMA’s JAMA Internal Medicine.  The 10-year study, conducted by researchers from the University of Michigan, analyzed 30-day readmission rates for patients treated for heart disease and pneumonia in 2,800 hospitals. Study Results “Association Between Hospitals’ Engagement in Value-based […]
AAPC Knowledge Center

New Payment Models and Rewards for Better Care at Lower Cost

Originally Published by CMS.gov

On July 25, 2016, the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) proposed new models that continue to shift Medicare reimbursements from quantity to quality by creating strong incentives for hospitals to deliver better care at a lower cost. These models would reward hospitals that work together with physicians and other providers to avoid complications, prevent hospital readmissions, and speed recovery.

Background

Under the proposed episode payment models, the hospital in which a patient is admitted for care for a heart attack, bypass surgery, or surgical hip/femur fracture treatment  would be accountable for the cost and quality of care provided to Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries during the inpatient stay and for 90 days after discharge. Participating hospitals will receive a separate target price for each MS-DRG under the model. All providers and suppliers would be paid under the usual payment system rules and procedures of the Medicare program for episode services throughout the year. At the end of a model performance year, actual spending for the episode (total expenditures for related services under Medicare Parts A and B) would be compared to the Medicare quality-adjusted target episode price that reflects episode quality for the responsible hospital. Hospitals that work with physicians and other providers to deliver the needed care for less than the quality-adjusted target price, while meeting or exceeding quality standards, would be paid the savings achieved. Hospitals with costs exceeding the quality-adjusted target price would be required to repay Medicare.

Episode Payment Model Details

Setting Target Prices for Specific Conditions

Each year, CMS would set target prices for different episodes based on historical data on total costs related to the episode for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries admitted for heart attacks, bypass surgery, or surgical hip/femur fracture treatment, beginning with the hospitalization and extending 90 days following discharge. Target prices would be adjusted based on the complexity of treating a heart attack or providing bypass surgery. For example, CMS proposes to adjust prices upwards for those heart attack patients who need to be transferred to a different hospital during their care to reflect the most resource-intensive cardiac care provided during the hospitalization. For heart attack patients, target prices would also differ depending on whether the patient was treated with surgery or medical management.

Target prices would be based on a blend of hospital-specific data and regional historical data:

July 1, 2017 – December 31, 2018 (performance years 1 and 2): Two-thirds participant-specific data and one-third regional data;

2019 (performance year 3): One-third participant-specific data and two-thirds regional data; and

2020 – 2021 (performance years 4 and 5): Only regional data.

 

Paying More for Higher-Quality Care

Under the proposed bundled payment models, hospitals that delivered higher-quality care would be eligible to be paid a higher amount of savings than those with lower quality performance. Specifically, an individual hospital’s quality-adjusted target price would be based on a 1.5 to 3 percent discount rate relative to historical spending, with the lowest discount percentage for those hospitals providing the highest-quality care. Payments would be based on a quality-first principle: only hospitals meeting quality standards would be paid the savings from providing care for less than the quality-adjusted target price.

Hospitals would be assessed based on quality metrics appropriate to each episode, using performance and improvement on required measures that are already used in other CMS programs and submission of voluntary data for other quality measures in development or implementation testing:

Heart attacks:

Hospital 30-Day, All-Cause, Risk-Standardized Mortality Rate Following Acute Myocardial Infarction (AMI) Hospitalization (NQF #0230)   
Excess Days in Acute Care after Hospitalization for Acute Myocardial Infarction
Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) Survey (NQF #0166)
Voluntary Hybrid Hospital 30-Day, All-Cause, Risk-Standardized Mortality eMeasure (NQF #2473) data submission

 
Bypass surgery:

Hospital 30-Day, All-Cause, Risk-Standardized Mortality Rate Following Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) Surgery (NQF #2558)
HCAHPS Survey (NQF #0166)

Hip/femur fractures (same measures as in the existing Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model):

Hospital-Level Risk-Standardized Complication Rate Following Elective Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) and/or Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) (NQF #1550)
HCAHPS Survey (#0166)
Voluntary Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA)/Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) and Limited Risk Variable data submission

As part of implementing the new models, CMS would provide hospitals with tools to help them improve care coordination and deliver higher-quality care. Proposed activities include providing participants with relevant spending and utilization data, waiving certain Medicare requirements to facilitate development of novel approaches to the delivery of care, and facilitating the sharing of best practices between participants through a learning and diffusion program.

Phased Implementation

Recognizing that hospitals will need time to adapt to the new models and establish processes to coordinate care, the proposed rule includes a number of measures to ease the transition, including gradually phasing-in risk.

Downside risk (possible repayments to Medicare) would be phased in:

 July 2017 – March 2018 (performance year 1 and quarter 1 of performance year 2):  No repayment;
April 2018 – December 2018 (quarters 2 through 4 of performance year 2): Capped at 5 percent;
2019 (performance year 3): Capped at 10 percent; and
2020 – 2021 (performance years 4 and 5): Capped at 20 percent.

Gains (payments from Medicare to hospitals) would be phased in:

 July 2017 – December 2018 (performance years 1 and 2): Capped at 5 percent;
2019 (performance year 3): Capped at 10 percent; and
2020 – 2021 (performance years 4 and 5): Capped at 20 percent.

The first performance period would run from July 1, 2017 to December 31, 2017. The second through fifth performance periods would align with calendar years 2018 through 2021.

How the Bundled Payments Would Work: An Example

Consider hospitals in model years 4 and 5 in a region where Medicare historically spent an average of $ 50,000 for each coronary bypass surgery patient, taking into account the costs of surgery as well as all related care provided in the 90 days after hospital discharge. Target prices would reflect the average historical pricing minus the discount rate based on quality performance and improvement.

Hospital A is performing at the highest overall level on quality measures and its discount rate is 1.5 percent for the episode. As a result, its quality-adjusted target price for bypass surgery is $ 49,250 (or $ 50,000 minus the discount of $ 750). By taking measures to avoid readmissions and other unnecessary costs, Hospital A is able to reduce average total hospitalization and related 90-day post-discharge costs for bypass surgery patients to $ 48,000. Hospital A would be paid average savings of $ 1,250 per patient. Hospital B in the same region also reduces its average costs to $ 48,000 per patient. However, it achieves only acceptable overall performance on quality measures. Its discount rate is 3 percent and its quality-adjusted target price is $ 48,500 (or $ 50,000 minus the discount of $ 1,500). Hospital B would be paid average savings of only $ 500 per patient. Hospital B in the same region also reduces its average costs to $ 48,000 per patient. However, it achieves only acceptable overall performance on quality measures. Its discount rate is 3 percent and its quality-adjusted target price is $ 48,500 (or $ 50,000 minus the discount of $ 1,500). Hospital B would be paid average savings of only $ 500 per patient. 

Participants in the New Bundles

For the new cardiac bundles, participants would be hospitals in 98 randomly-selected metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). Hospitals outside these geographic areas would not participate in the model.  There is no application process for hospitals for these models.

Because the hip/femur fracture surgeries model builds upon the existing CJR model, CMS proposes to test these bundled payments in the same 67 MSAs that were selected for that model.

Rural counties are excluded from the models. In addition, CMS proposes to limit financial risk for the remaining rural hospitals that are located in participating MSAs, such as sole community hospitals, Medicare-dependent hospitals, and rural referral centers.  Specifically, these hospitals’ total losses are limited to 3 percent for the second through fourth quarters of 2018 and 5 percent for 2019 through 2021.

Collaboration with Other Providers

One of the major goals of bundled payments is to encourage coordination among all providers involved in a patient’s care: for example, collaboration between hospitals and physicians and skilled nursing facilities. Therefore, as in the CJR model, CMS is proposing to allow hospital participants to enter into financial arrangements with other types of providers (for example, skilled nursing facilities and physicians), as well as with Medicare Shared Savings Program Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs). Those arrangements would allow hospital participants to share reconciliation payments, internal cost savings, and the responsibility for repayment to Medicare with other providers and entities who choose to enter into these arrangements, subject to the limitations outlined in the proposed rule.

Evaluation

As noted above, preliminary results from other tests of bundled payments for cardiac and orthopedic care suggest that these models have strong potential to improve patient care while reducing costs. Because they will include a wide range of hospitals around the country, the models announced today will allow CMS to test the impact of bundles on quality and cost when implemented at scale and across all types of providers and patients.

CMS’s evaluation of the models will examine quality during the episode period, after the episode ends, and for longer durations such as one year mortality rates. CMS will examine outcomes and patient experience measures such as mortality, readmissions, complications, and other clinically relevant outcomes. The evaluation will include both quantitative and qualitative data and will use a variety of methods and measures in assessing quality. The outcomes examined will include: claims-based measures such as hospital readmission rates, emergency room visits rates, and the amount of care deferred beyond the 90-day post-hospital discharge episode duration; HCAHPS satisfaction and care experience measures; and functional performance change scores from the patient assessment instruments in home health agencies and skilled nursing facilities. In addition, CMS plans for the evaluation to include a beneficiary survey that will be used to assess the impact of the model on beneficiary perceptions of access, satisfaction, mobility, and other relevant functional performance measures.

In addition to the formal evaluation, CMS is proposing continuous monitoring of arrangements between participants and collaborators and auditing of patients’ medical records to allow early detection of and intervention in any quality concerns.  

 

Additional Information

The Medical Management Institute – MMI – Medical Coding News & MMI Updates