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

Medical necessity of Viscosupplementation

There are a number of carriers that will not cover Viscosupplementation for the treatment of osteoarthritis in the knee, as they deem it ineffective. Specific carrier verbage reads:

"….. many analyses have not shown a clinical benefit beyond the effect seen with placebo, and evidence from recent large, double-blinded, and high-quality trials suggests the clinical benefit of hyaluronan is of minimal benefit over intra-articular placebo (Bannuru, 2015).

The question raised is are providers still allowed to bill the injection (20610, 20611) for OA to the carrier, and charge the patient for the drug? Or because we are injecting a substance that is not covered by the plan, would the administration of that substance also fall under not medically necessary?

Here is the actual policy from the carrier for your reference. https://www.empireblue.com/medicalpo…pw_c160709.htm

Thank you for your help.

Medical Billing and Coding Forum

Diagnosis Coding and Medical Necessity from Radiology Reports in the ED Facility

I review emergency department charts on the facility side and I often have to review charts from our denials department. I have a case where an MRA of the neck was ordered with a dx of arm numbness and TIA. The nurse is asking if TIA can be added in the Attending’s final impression to support medical necessity for the MRA. The attending reviewed the findings from the radiologist "Diffuse white matter signal abnormalities in the bilateral cerebral cortices, most likely related to chronic microvascular disease. There are no signs of acute ischemia, hemorrhage, or mass." And, the attending documented that the MRA was negative in his progress note and left his final impression of arm numbness.

These are my questions:

1. Can the dx of R93.0, abnormal findings on diagnostic imaging of skull and head, NEC, be reported. Please note: the attending does not address these findings and states the MRA is negative.
2. Can the TIA dx be reported if it is only found on the order? There are no other signs and symptoms in the medical record to support medical necessity for the MRA of the neck.
3. Should I query the provider?

Medical Billing and Coding Forum

10 Documentation and Coding Principles to Demonstrate Medical Necessity

When preparing medical documentation and coding medical conditions, keep these 10 principles in mind to demonstrate medical necessity for services reported: List the principal diagnosis, condition, problem, or other reason for the medical service or procedure. Be specific when describing the patient’s condition, illness, or disease. Distinguish between acute and chronic conditions, when appropriate. Identify […]
AAPC Knowledge Center

Medical Necessity Question

Afternoon to all, I am new to the coding world and I’m currently coding for and Urgent Care with multiple facilities and Providers. Having an issue with one wanting to use Otalgia (ear pain) as medical necessity for 87880 Strep test. All my research and guidelines including the ones from the Medical Director state is tied to pain in throat or fever. Any and all help would be greatly appreciated. The other coder here is also an apprentice. Thanks in advance, Debby

Medical Billing and Coding Forum

The Medical Necessity Hot Button

Clearing up the confusion surrounding Medical Necessity!

by Lori-Lynne A. Webb, CPC, CCS-P, CCP, COBGC, CHDA  (originally printed through HCPro March 2017)

Understanding and determining medical necessity can be very complex for physicians, clinicians, coders, and billers.A physician or clinical provider of care may have a completely different understanding, interpretation, and definition of medical necessity than the patient or a patient’s family member. A third-party insurance payer may also have another completely different understanding and application of the term.

Defining medical necessity

So what is medical necessity? Coders or billers struggle to understand and sort out as the term, which leads to misinterpretation and misunderstanding of what needs to be communicated in a variety of areas.

CMS provides a specific definition under the Social Security Act:

… no Medicare payment shall be made for items or services that are not reasonable and necessary for the diagnosis or treatment of illness or injury or to improve the functioning of a malformed body member.

In essence, the diagnosis drives medical necessity. Coders need to understand the diagnosis itself, as well as what services or treatment options are available to the provider.

Third-party payers add more confusion

Medical necessity can also be confusing when it comes to who is going to pay for the procedure or services. Many third-party payers have specific coverage rules regarding what they consider medically necessary or have riders and exclusions for specific procedures. Third-party payers may have a specific exclusion for procedures that they consider experimental, unproven for a specific diagnosis, or cosmetic.

One example is a surgeon using a daVinci robotic surgical device to perform a laparoscopic surgery. Upon pre-authorization for the surgery, the insurance payer states it will not pay for the surgery if the daVinci is used. The insurer’s policy includes a rider that deems the daVinci as an experimental surgical device. However, if the physician uses a traditional laparoscopic or open procedure, the third-party payer would reimburse. In this case, the insurance carrier is not stating that the surgery is not medically necessary, just that it will not reimburse for this surgery if the robotic device is used.

Even if a particular procedure or service is considered medically necessary, some payers impose limits on how many times a provider may render a specific service within a specified time frame. For Medicare and Medicaid, these limitations are known as National Coverage Determinations (NCD) and Local Coverage Determination (LCD). Private payers may simply refer to this type of limitation as a policy guideline or policy exclusion or rider.

Within these guidelines, payers may define where or when they will cover a specific service, but may limit coverage to a specific diagnosis. For example, insurance policies may have a wellness or preventive care benefit, but may only cover one such visit per year. Some payers may only reimburse for a single Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) test per year. The payer may require a documented screening diagnosis in coordination with the test.

If the patient underwent a PSA test January 1, 2012, for screening, his insurance may not pay for another test until 365 days (or one calendar year) have elapsed. However, if the patient undergoes a PSA blood test for screening and the test results are abnormal, the clinician may decide another PSA test is needed. The coder must submit that claim as a PSA blood test with the appropriate diagnosis for a sign, symptom, or abnormality, not as a screening.


Documenting medical necessity
Medical necessity continues to be open for interpretation by all parties involved. Many third-party payers have created lists of criteria they use to interpret medical necessity. These lists do not necessarily reflect all options, but payers include this reference in their policy guidelines.

Most providers have not developed a comprehensive listing of medically necessary qualifiers, so coders and clinicians must focus on good documentation and coding accuracy to communicate the medical necessity of services accurately to payers. If third-party payers deny reimbursement for medical services, physicians, clinicians, and coders need to rely on the formal appeal process.

Medical necessity documentation from a physician or provider should include the following:

§  Severity of the “signs and symptoms” or direct diagnosis exhibited by the patient. This is our diagnosis driver, and multiple diagnoses may be involved.

§  Probability of an adverse or a positive outcome for the patient, and how that risk equates to the diagnosis currently being evaluated. This is the medical risk vs. gain.

§  Need and/or availability of diagnostic studies and/or therapeutic intervention(s) to evaluate and investigate the patient’s presenting problem or current acute or chronic medical condition. In other words, does the facility, office, or hospital have what the provider or clinician needs to render care?

These bullet points reflect the basics of evaluation and management (E/M) guidelines that are currently in place from CPT®: the history, exam, and medical decision making processes. Coders will have an easier time evaluating medical necessity from this aspect. Of course, a good understanding of this integration of medical necessity within the E/M guidelines makes communicating this same principle to the providers much easier. Coders should encourage providers to continually enhance their documentation to improve overall coordination between the medical record, coding accuracy, and third-party payer reimbursement.

The third-party payers employ a wide spectrum of policies defining medical necessity is and should encompass. Physicians, clinical providers, and coders should review what these payers have established within their guidelines. Someone within the physician office, hospital, or medical facility should thoroughly scrutinize these guidelines before establishing a contractual relationship with a particular third party payer. This up-front communication will help avoid claim denials in the future.

Here are some examples of what some third party payers are currently including in their medically necessary verbiage:

§  Treatment is consistent with the symptoms or diagnosis of the illness, injury, or symptoms under review by the provider of care.

§  Treatment is necessary and consistent with generally accepted professional medical standards (i.e., not experimental or investigational).

§  Treatment is not furnished primarily for the convenience of the patient, the attending physician, or another physician or supplier.

§  Treatment is furnished at the most appropriate level that can be provided safely and effectively to the patient, and is neither more or less than what the patient is requiring at that specific point in time.

§  The disbursement of medical care and/or treatment must not be related to the patient’s or the third party payer’s monetary status or benefit.

Documentation of all medical care should accurately reflect the need for and outcome of the treatment.
Treatment or medical services deemed to be medically necessary by the provider of those services,(e.g., physician, therapist, clinician, etc.) does not imply or infer that the service(s) provided will be covered by or deemed a medically necessary service payable by a third-party insurance payer.

Medical Necessity Q&A

Q:  Could you give me some guidance on how I can instruct my MD’s on avoiding vague and/or subjective clinical documentation?
A:.  Ask your providers to adequately describe his/her skilled care providedand give a clear picture of the treatment and/or “next steps” to be taken.
Do not use vague or subjective descriptions like “tolerated treatment well,” “improving,” “caregiver instructed on med management,” or “continue with plan of care.”   “patient is here for follow up”
examples of more complete and compliant statements:
1.     Patient tolerated ROM exercises with a pain level of 6/10.
2.     Patient was able to verbalize understanding and importance of checking their blood sugars prior to administering insulin.
3.     Plan for next visit: to continue education on importance of daily inspection of feet for diabetic patient, provide wound care, etc.
Q  I work in dermatology and need to know what documentation is required for excisions?  We are struggling with getting paid  
A:  The provider should include the actual “size” of the lesion/mass they are going to excise.  Then they should document the area of the excision which needs to include the lesion + any margins.  (Height, Width, Depth) and if circular/elliptical etc… and denote the “why” it was performed that way.    If you have to appeal, the problem with using strictly the sizes from a pathology report, is that tissue “shrinks” once it is excised, and the would “enlarges” once the tissue is excised. 
Q.  What is the BEST way to document our time spent… the CPT codes state a vague “time” amount but the doctors struggle with this..  
A.  Notation of Time in/Time out is always very helpful…  it is also helpful if the provider “explains”  the time.  Eg –  spent 20 minutes of our 30 minute visit discussing how to properly use their new asthma inhaler.  Or  I was requested by Dr. Doe for “standby” for a possible cesarean section during vaginal delivery.  I entered the delivery room at 0800 and departed at 0915 status post a successful vaginal delivery.

Coders must understand the complex relationships between the physician, the patient, the medical record documentation, the coder, the biller, the insurance payer, and the communication between all of these entities to successfully guide the interpretation of medical necessity.

Lori-Lynne’s Coding Coach Blog

Medical Necessity Remains Central When Documenting in the EMR

Since electronic medical records (EMR) have become prevalent, there has been concern whether documentation in the patient record accurately reflects medical necessity and the services provided. When I started working in the healthcare setting, we always told providers, “Not documented, not done.” Now, when I review a chart note, the question I
AAPC Knowledge Center

ICD-10: Preventing Medical Necessity Denials

Originally Posted in ICD-10 Monitor

Given the added specificity inherent in ICD-10, it’s no surprise that medical necessity denials for physician practices and medical groups are expected to increase throughout 2016. In addition to greater levels of code granularity, three key industry drivers are expected to impact ICD-10 coding compliance among physician practices in the year ahead.

First, payers will continue to refine coverage policies based on the new code set. Second, the ICD-10 grace period for physician practices comes to a close as of Oct. 1, 2016. And finally, almost 6,000 new ICD-10 codes will be added that same day as the partial code freeze concludes. These factors will impact all providers, but they will be especially notable within physician practices and medical groups. 

Practices are also predicted to struggle with reporting ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes that aren’t medically necessary as it pertains to supporting the corresponding CPT codes. Without proactive planning, the following three specialties may see an increase in medical necessity denials in the months ahead: 

• Cardiology
• Pathology/Laboratory
• Radiology

    This article takes a closer look at these specialties to identify common medical necessity gaps in physician documentation and clinical coding. Left open, these gaps carry the potential to increase denials, audits, and revenue loss in 2016. 

     

    Cardiology Concerns 

    With 42 national coverage determinations (NCDs), cardiology is both a high-volume and a high-value service line. While CPT and E&M codes prevail in cardiology claims, the correct assignment of an ICD-10 code drives medical necessity decisions through NCDs. Some cardiology practices are already experiencing medical necessity denials related to the following: 

    • Unspecified codes
    • Incomplete codes
    • Use of services for specific diagnoses

      Specific concerns for cardiology include incorrect documentation for certain common conditions. To ensure accurate assignment of codes, documentation must support the specificity of each code category. 

      Hypertension: While ICD-10 has only one code for chronic hypertension (I10), there are more specific codes required for hypertension caused by another disease. To ensure accuracy of code assignment, make sure the causal relationship is clearly documented (i.e. pulmonary hypertension, renal hypertension, etc.). 

      Acute MI: Acute myocardial infarctions (AMIs) must include documentation stating “acute” for four weeks from the time of the initial MI. For subsequent AMIs occurring within the four-week period of the initial MI, physicians must also document the four-week period and note that it is a subsequent AMI. 

      Congestive heart failure: For heart failure, be sure to document the type (acute, chronic, acute on chronic) and severity (systolic, diastolic, combined systolic on diastolic). 

      Atherosclerosis with angina: For atherosclerosis, be sure to document the cause of the atherosclerosis, whether the condition is stable or unstable, the artery involved, and whether the artery is native or autologous. If there is a bypass graft, also document the graft, the original location of the graft, and whether it is autologous or biologic.

      Ischemic cardiomyopathy: The diagnosis of ischemic cardiomyopathy must also state the type (dilated/congestive, obstructive or nonobstructive, hypertrophic), location (endocarditis, right ventricle), and the cause (congenital or alcohol). 

      Valvular heart disease: When documenting disease of heart valve, be sure to specify the cause (rheumatic or non-rheumatic), type (prolapse, insufficiency, regurgitation, incompetence, stenosis), and location (mitral valve, aortic valve).

       

      Common Radiology Pathology and Lab Errors in Practice

      Pathology, lab, and radiology services are all impacted by the laterality specificity required in ICD-10-CM diagnosis coding. It is imperative that the provider document whether diagnostic services are being performed on the left, right, or bilateral sides to ensure the most specific code assignment. 

      Providers should also note that ICD-10-PCS impacts code assignment for the inpatient component of radiology and pathology. All documentation for radiology and pathology procedures must meet the increased specificity required for these procedures. Procedures must also match the specificity in the professional (physician) component CPT code as well. 

       

      Three More Medical Necessity “Gotchas” 

      Diabetes, neoplasms, and pain codes are also key areas for medical necessity concerns in ICD-10.

      There are five category codes for diabetes mellitus in ICD-10-CM. Diabetes due to underlying conditions, category E08, requires clear documentation of the underlying condition as follows. This includes hyperosmolarity, ketoacidosis, kidney complications, ophthalmic complications, neurological complications, circulatory complications, other specified complications, and unspecified complications and w/o complications. 

      E08 – Diabetes mellitus due to underlying conditions
      E09 – Drug or chemical-induced diabetes mellitus
      E10 – Type 1 diabetes mellitus
      E11 – Type 2 diabetes mellitus
      E13 – Other specified diabetes mellitus 

       

      Many neoplasm codes require more specific locations of the neoplasm and laterality specificity. One example is malignant neoplasm of the breast. Note that the gender must be documented for accurate assignment of code category for breast cancer as well. 

      In ICD-10-CM, the documentation for pain requires more specificity for location of pain (specific extremity such as arm, leg, finger, etc.), area of the pain in the specific extremity (forearm, upper arm, etc.), and laterality (left, right, bilateral). 

      M79.621

      Pain in right upper arm

      M79.622

      Pain in left upper arm

      M79.629

      Pain in unspecified upper arm

      M79.631

      Pain in right forearm

      M79.632

      Pain in left forearm

      M79.639

      Pain in unspecified forearm

        

      Eight Proactive Steps to Take

      Ultimately, the goal is to prevent medical necessity denials before they occur, rather than chasing them down after claims rejections or denials. Consider the following eight steps to mitigate medical necessity denials in physician practices and medical groups.

      Focus on clinical documentation improvement—answer the “why:” The importance of CDI cannot be understated. The goal for each physician encounter note is to answer the “why” of every visit, every procedure, and every test.

      CDI should be embedded in each practice’s workflow from the time the patient registers for an appointment through the actual encounter and during the billing period. This includes training on ICD-10 documentation requirements for front-office staff, all providers who document in the record, and back-end staff. As ICD-10 denials occur, be sure to disseminate this information, along with documentation improvement tips, to providers by specialty. 

      Track unspecified codes: Perform a detailed review of all unspecified codes. Is an unspecified code clinically appropriate, or could the physician have documented greater specificity? Physician documentation should demonstrate diagnostic severity and specific patient outcomes to support appropriate ICD-10-CM code assignment. Unspecified codes are predicted to be a key target for payor denials in 2016 as the grace period for physician practices comes to a close. 

      Monitor and update NCDs and LCDs: This is an ongoing process that practices must maintain consistently to ensure that all coverage requirements are met and documented. Review annually for high-volume procedures. To find more information about NCDs for your specific region, go online to https://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/overview-and-quick-search.aspx

      Work with your EMR vendor: When possible, build (or enhance) electronic medical record (EMR) templates to encourage greater specificity in clinical documentation for each visit, diagnosis, procedure, and test. For example, for coding pain, specific extremity, location, and laterality must be coded, as mentioned above. 

      Review all pre-authorizations and referrals: Ensure that any orders for ancillary testing include specific ICD-10-CM codes that meet medical necessity requirements. Check with your hospital counterparts to make sure that accurate information is received from the ordering provider. Lack of sufficient physician documentation for ancillary testing and procedures is a top concern for all providers. 

      One teaching hospital in the Midwest experienced continued medical necessity denials for outpatient services in cardiology, radiology, and laboratory, resulting in significant write-offs and lost revenue. Poor quality physician documentation on outpatient testing orders was identified as the primary culprit.  

      Know your payor policies: Many payor claims processing guidelines have changed with ICD-10, resulting in increased rejections and requiring providers to keep close tabs on denials. The most frequently reported reasons for denials include:

      • Invalid ICD-10 code
      • Nonspecific ICD-10 code
      • Lack of medical necessity for procedure performed
      • Patient ineligible for service 

        Revisit payer policies for your most common diagnoses, procedures, and testing.

         

        Monitor medical necessity denials closely: When a medical necessity denial occurs, track the specific reason for the denial as well as the specialty, clinician, and payor. Share this data with the entire clinical, coding, and billing teams within your practice or medical group. Conduct targeted documentation and coding education to highlight what documentation was missing. Finally, when educational efforts are complete, conduct audits to gauge overall improvement in medical necessity denial rates for each specific diagnosis or procedure. 

         

        The Road Ahead 

        Going forward, physician practices must devote ample time and resources to combat medical necessity denials. While it’s true that the potential for medical necessity denials is greater in ICD-10, consistent implementation of solid processes for denial mitigation across your physician practice or medical group is a smart strategy.  

         

        About the Author

        Daria Bonner, CHCA, CCP, RMC, chief training officer for Medical Management Institute, has more than 22 years of healthcare industry advisory consulting and project management experience. Her areas of expertise encompass the public and the private sector, hospitals, outpatient service centers, and large and small physician practices. Dari is an expert in commercial and VHA healthcare business process analysis, process modeling, project management, software product development, product implementation, and healthcare information technology. Dari has served as a project director for multiple management-consulting firms, including Booz Allen Hamilton, QuadraMed, Inc., and Ingenix. 

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

        Medical Necessity Is a Necessity, Even for Low Level Visits

        Don’t forget the role of medical necessity when reporting a low-level evaluation and management (E/M) service, such as 99211 Office or other outpatient visit for the evaluation and management of an established patient…usually, the presenting problem(s) are minimal. For example, a patient has an established diagnosis of hypertension. The provider documents that the patient should […]
        AAPC Blog