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

Proper Use of Modifier 50


Novitas Solutions recently released a Modifier 50 Fact Sheet. It’s reminding to medical coders of the proper use for this CPT payment modifier. 

The Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC) for Jurisdictions H and L warns that, effective for Part B claims received on and after Aug. 16, 2019, services will be rejected as unprocessable when modifier 50 Bilateral procedure is used inappropriately. 

When is the right time to append modifier 50? 
  • Modifier 50 may be appropriate if the bilateral indicator is 1 or 3. 
  • Do not append modifier 50 to a code with a bilateral surgery indicator of 0, 2 or 9. 

Inappropriate Use: 

  • Inappropriate to apply to a “bilateral description” code.
  • Do not append to procedures for midline organs such as the bladder, uterus, esophagus or nasal septum.
  • Inappropriate to report when performed on different areas of same side of body.
  • Modifier 50 cannot be appended when bilateral indicators are 0, 2, or 9. 

Example: 

The terminology for procedure code 27158 (osteotomy, pelvis, bilateral) indicates the procedure is performed bilaterally. Therefore, it’s not appropriate to report modifier 50 with this procedure code. 

Bilateral Surgery indicators:

“0″ indicates a unilateral code; Modifier 50 is not billable. 
“1” indicates modifier 50 can be appropriate. 
“2” indicates a bilateral code; modifier 50 is not billable. 
“3” indicates primary radiology codes; modifier 50 is billable.
“9” indicates that the concept does not apply. (office visit) 

Click Here to verify the B/L modifier Indicator 

Additional Information: 

Don’t Report Modifiers 50 and 78 Together, 

  • If a (subsequent) bilateral procedure requires a return to the operating room after the initial surgery, and the bilateral indicator in the MPFSDB is 1 or 2, do not submit CPT modifier 50. 
  • CPT modifiers 50 and 78 cannot be submitted for the same service. Instead, submit the surgery procedure code with CPT modifier 78 and HCPCS modifier RT on one line, and submit the same surgery procedure code with CPT modifier 78 and HCPCS modifier LT on a separate detail line.

Source: https://www.novitas-solutions.com/webcenter/portal/MedicareJL/pagebyid?contentId=00144531 



Coding Ahead

Proper Usage of Modifier 59


When you have distinct, separate procedures, know which modifiers will get the claim paid in full.

Modifier 59 Distinct procedural service acts as a “universal unbundling” modifier for procedures that are normally included as part of another procedure, or “bundled.” The modifier tells the payer that there are special circumstances that warrant separate reporting (and payment) of the unbundled code.

Special circumstances that generally warrant modifier 59 include,

The procedures were performed at separate encounters on the same day.

The procedures were performed during the same encounter on separate anatomic organ systems or body sites, incisions, excisions, lesions, or injuries.

The procedures were timed and performed sequentially.

The diagnostic procedure preceded and was the basis for a therapeutic procedure.

An unplanned diagnostic procedure occurred subsequent to the therapeutic procedure.

Be Accurate, Avoid Denials,

Because claims are processed without the physician’s documentation, payers rely on the information sent to them to be accurate and assume there is documentation backing it up. Unfortunately, modifier 59 gets misused a lot. As a result, some payers now automatically deny CPT codes appended with modifier 59. 

This forces the provider to appeal the denial and send in the documentation to show that modifier 59 was applied correctly. This denial and appeal process is costly for both the provider and the payer — it delays payment and forces the provider’s staff to write appeals and the payer’s staff to read documentation and process appeals.

New Modifiers Replace Modifier 59

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) created four new modifiers, referred to as X[ESPU], to better differentiate between the reasons for unbundling codes,
  • XE Separate encounter
  • XS Separate structure
  • XP Separate practitioner
  • XU Unusual non-overlapping service
These modifiers apply to Medicare Part B. Some commercial insurance companies have indicated in their online reimbursement manuals they will process the X[ESPU] modifiers, as well, such as Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey.

CMS does not require providers to use modifiers X[ESPU] in place of modifier 59, and they continue to accept modifier 59, for now. However, if your practice ignores the modifiers which carry more specific information and uses modifier 59 instead, do not be surprised if your Part B carrier audits your modifier 59 usage to make sure it’s not being over-utilized to unbundle CPT codes. Be sure to review the documentation and ask yourself if the unbundling is justified enough to apply the appropriate X[ESPU] modifier.


Let’s see at few examples of when each of the “X” modifiers are used.

Modifier XE

This modifier tells the payer that the service is distinct because it occurred during a separate encounter on the same date of service as the bundled procedure.

Example:

The patient sees the otolaryngologist in the morning, at which time the doctor performs an evaluation and management (E/M). During the visit, the patient complains of nasal congestion and headaches and the doctor performs a diagnostic nasal endoscopy. The visit is coded,

99213-25            Office or other outpatient visit for the evaluation and management of an established patient, which requires at least 2 of these 3 key components: An expanded problem focused history; An expanded problem focused examination; Medical decision making of low complexity. -Significant, separately identifiable evaluation and management service by the same physician or other qualified health care professional on the same day of the procedure or other service.

31231     Nasal endoscopy, diagnostic, unilateral or bilateral (separate procedure)

That evening, the patient experiences a severe nosebleed and goes to the emergency room (ER). The ER physician is unable to stop the bleeding and calls the otolaryngologist in. The otolaryngologist comes to the ER and performs an extensive control of the nasal hemorrhage with packing. This encounter in the ER for the otolaryngologist is coded,

30903     Control nasal hemorrhage, anterior, complex (extensive cautery and/or packing) any method

CPT 30903 is a National Correct Coding Initiative (NCCI) Column 2 code for 31231, meaning the two codes are bundled and not separately payable. Appending modifier XE to 30903 tells the payer that the procedure performed in the ER was a separate encounter from the diagnostic nasal endoscopy performed that same day in the office.

Modifier XS

This modifier tells the payer the procedure is distinct because it was performed on a separate organ or structure than the bundled procedure.

Example:

The patient arrives at an orthopedist for a knee injection with ultrasound guidance on the left knee and an aspiration of the right knee without ultrasound guidance.

20611-LT             Arthrocentesis, aspiration and/or injection, major joint or bursa (eg, shoulder, hip, knee, subacromial bursa); with ultrasound guidance, with permanent recording and reporting -Left side

20610-XS-RT      Arthrocentesis, aspiration and/or injection, major joint or bursa (eg, shoulder, hip, knee, subacromial bursa); without ultrasound guidance -Right side

20610 is a Column 2 code for 20611. Modifiers LT and RT seem to be enough, telling the payer that the two procedures were performed on two different sides, but not all payers allow modifiers LT and RT to break a bundle. Modifier XS or modifier 59 is needed to break the bundle.

Modifier XP

This modifier tells the payer that the service is distinct from the bundled service because it was performed by a different practitioner.

Example:

A colorectal surgeon performs 44147 Colectomy, partial; abdominal and transanal approach while another surgeon in the group performs +38747 Abdominal lymphadenectomy, regional, including celiac, gastric, portal, peripancreatic, with or without para-aortic and vena caval nodes (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure). CPT +38747 is a Column 2 code of 44147, but since a different physician performed this procedure, modifier XP is used to break the bundle. Coding is: 44147, 38747-XP.

Modifier XU

This modifier tells the payer that the service is distinct because it does not overlap usual components of the main service.

Example:

The otolaryngologist performs a rigid diagnostic nasal endoscopy for nasal complaints, and then pulls out the rigid endoscope and performs a flexible laryngoscopy to evaluate the patient’s complaints of coughing, throat clearing, and difficulty swallowing.

A nasal endoscopy and flexible laryngoscopy are not usually both coded and charged during the same encounter because the same scope can be used for both diagnostic procedures.

31231-XU            Nasal endoscopy, diagnostic, unilateral or bilateral (separate procedure)

31575     Laryngoscopy, flexible; diagnostic

CPT 31231 is coded whether a rigid endoscope or a flexible endoscope is used, and it’s a Column 2 code of 31575. Interestingly, 31231 has more relative value units (RVUs) than 31575, and should be listed first.


Coding Ahead

Is it proper to bill 31233 (approach) with CPT 31267 (Cyst removal)?

The physician performed an antral puncture with removal of cyst from the left maxillary sinus. Attempts were unsuccessful through the nose. The canine fossa using a scalpel and a inch drill punch was performed through the anterior wall of the left maxillary sinus. This allowed the endoscope to be passed through the front of the sinus visualizing the maxillary sinus in front of it. A curved biting forcep was then passed through the nose into the sinus and under endoscopic guidance through the antral puncture the cyst was grasped and removed. Would it be proper to code as CPT 31267 and CPT 31233 with a 59 modifier?

Medical Billing and Coding Forum

Is it proper to code CPT 31233 (approach) and 31267 (cyst removal) together?

The physician performed an antral puncture with removal of cyst from the left maxillary sinus. Attempts were unsuccessful through the nose. The canine fossa using a scalpel and a inch drill punch was performed through the anterior wall of the left maxillary sinus. This allowed the endoscope to be passed through the front of the sinus visualizing the maxillary sinus in front of it. A curved biting forcep was then passed through the nose into the sinus and under endoscopic guidance through the antral puncture the cyst was grasped and removed. Would it be proper to code as CPT 31267 and CPT 31233 with a 59 modifier?

Medical Billing and Coding Forum

Proper coding for patients seen by a specialist during their observation stay

I just wanted to confirm with the panel the correct way to bill for an exhisting pateint who was seen in the hospital during the observation stay portion prior to being formally admitted as an inpatient. We are an oncology practice and one of our oncologist was asked to consult on a patient for Hematology reasons, while the patient was still registered as being in observation. The physician obliged and saw the patient, but marked teh encounter as an initial inpatient visit (99221-99223).

Per CMS guidelines (PUB 100-04 Claim Processing Manual, Transmittal 2282, section 30.6.8 Payment fo Hosptial Observation Services and Observation of Inpateint Care Services (including admission and discharge), "Payment for an initial observation care code is for all the care rendered by the ordering physician on the date the patient’s observation services began. All other physicians who furnish consultations or additional evaluations or services while the patient is receiving hospital outpatient observation services must bill the appropriate outpatient service codes."

Unfortunately, it does not go into detail on how to code if the patient being seen was already and exhisting patient of the consulting physician. Since we are told to use the appropriate outpatient codes (99211-99215, 99201-99205), the question was asked which would be the more appropriate code type of code, exhisting or new patient? I think an argument could be made for both code types, but my gut feeling is that we are bound by the 3yr rule when using the outpatient codes. Is this the more prudent way to approach these scenarios?

Greg Quinn, CPC, CPPM, CHONC

Medical Billing and Coding Forum

Focus on Documentation to Improve Proper Payments for Lenses

Insufficient documentation accounted for more than 77 percent of the 85.2 percent improper payment rate for lenses during last year’s reporting period, according to the 2018 Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) Supplemental Improper Payment Data. You can help reduce this staggering error rate by being aware of the national and local coverage policies physicians and non-physician practitioners […]

The post Focus on Documentation to Improve Proper Payments for Lenses appeared first on AAPC Knowledge Center.

AAPC Knowledge Center

Proper use of 96146

Hello Everyone,

Does anyone know the proper use of code 96146? Magellan guidelines say that it should not be billed when a Psychologist administers the test. It was a single test administered automatically by they computer but we are psychiatric hospital so we don’t leave our clients unattended on the computer so our psychologist was there the whole time answering questions. Maybe I just answered my own question, since the psychologist was there to answer questions it would be 96130 for the first hour and then the add on code for additional time?

Thank you,

Jen

Medical Billing and Coding Forum

Ensure Proper MIPS Payment Adjustments with a Targeted Review

Right out of the gate, Medicare Incentive-based Payment System (MIPS) adjustments were incorrectly applied to nonphysician services and supplies. This error is being corrected by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), but what if no one caught it? MIPS eligible clinicians and clinician groups could have improperly lost or gained considerable revenue. This […]

The post Ensure Proper MIPS Payment Adjustments with a Targeted Review appeared first on AAPC Knowledge Center.

AAPC Knowledge Center

Proper Documentation

Would this be acceptable documentation for a laceration repair or does it need to be more in depth?

Laceration Repair
Date/Time: 11/8/2018 1:12AM

Performed by: Dr. X

Authorized by: Dr. X

Consent: Verbal consent obtained.
Body area: head/neck

Location details: scalp
Laceration length: 3 cm
Irrigation solution: saline
Amount of cleaning: extensive
Skin closure: staples
Number of sutures: 5
Dressing: antibiotic ointment

Medical Billing and Coding Forum

Hand coders please do me a favor, tell me which codes are proper to submit please

The following was done to the left middle finger. Please tell me which codes that you think are correct to submit. All procedures were performed on the same tendon through the same incision.

26433 Repair of extensor tendon, not in Zone II
26445 Tenolysis of extensor tendon (performed through same incision)
20660 K wire insertion through the DIP joint to hold joint in place
76000 Fluoroscopy

This is for physician education

Medical Billing and Coding Forum