A United Approach

June 14th, 2019 - Namas
Categories:   Audits/Auditing   Billing   Claims   Evaluation & Management (E/M)   Electronic Medical Records (EMR/EHR)   Medicare   CPT® Coding  
0 Votes - Sign in to vote or comment.

A United Approach

As auditors, we all have a different perspective when evaluating documentation. It would be unreasonable to think that we all view things the same way. In my opinion, differing perspectives are what makes a great team because you can coalesce on a particular chart, work it through and decide on different approaches to help educate providers. Our shared ultimate goal is always to provide the best education to providers on documentation and compliance guidelines.
This being said, I feel it is important that the methodology and the message conveyed be consistent across the board. Let me share with you a situation I encountered over the last month to provide some background on my thought process.


A very good friend of mine, whose practice I have worked with for 8 years, was recently notified by their MAC that they were to have a TPE (Targeted Probe and Educate) audit of their level 4 established patient visits. TPEs are pre-payment audits that CMS started and per the CMS website "the program is designed to help providers and suppliers reduce claim denials and appeals through one-on-one help."


OK, lower those skeptical brows, there's more. On their website, CMS also states that "Providers whose claims are compliant with Medicare policy won't be chosen for TPE." Great news! (Eyebrows back down folks.) They were given a list of 40 charts to pull documentation for, and being me, I went in to review those charts before they were submitted and audited them myself.
This way the practice would have an idea of what they may be looking at from the MAC's perspective. Out of those 40 charts I reviewed, at least half did not support a level 4 established patient visit. The only reason they did not was because the picture painted of the visit did not support the medical necessity of a level 4 visit. If you have ever heard my colleague Shannon DeConda, president and founder of NAMAS, talk about E&M auditing, you can probably hear her voice in your head saying "Guys, CMS states that medical necessity is the overarching criterion for payment in addition to the documentation requirements of a CPT code."


At NAMAS and DoctorsManagement, this is a topic we constantly educate our clients on. These charts had wonderfully lengthy documentation thanks to our EHR vendor; however, when it came down to the assessment and plan along with the HPI, the purpose of the visit wasn't clear. Honestly, it looked like a painting by Monet: great from a distance, but the closer you looked at it, the uglier it got.
Fast forward to a week after submission, and the results came back. The MAC agreed with 36 of the 40 charts, and the 4 they disagreed with, they UPCODED to a level 5. Now I suspect that not only are eyebrows up in your hairline but your jaw also has hit the floor. I thought to myself, wow, that is a vastly different perspective of the paintings I looked at. Then I thought about it, and thought about it some more. Remembering that I had been doing other E&M research that week I recalled seeing a bunch of old PowerPoint presentations on the web and was shocked at how many of them said that Medical Decision Making was what determined your level of service, and none of them mentioned medical necessity at all. The light bulb went off: I don't think it was a different perspective, but a different methodology. The auditor could not have factored in medical necessity when reviewing those charts.


Now you see the reason I chose to write about this. If we as auditors are not auditing and educating using the same methodology, how can we be a benefit to our providers and clients? At NAMAS we are provider advocates; we work hard to help providers understand the documentation that needs to be in their encounters to support the medical necessity of the visit. If we are successful in our teaching, the providers can have meaningful visits with their patients without having a computer in their face, complete the visit, sit down and document based on the level of medical necessity, saving valuable time, and the result are notes with clearly documented assessments and plans that paint a clear picture of why patients were seen and what was done in response.
When auditors are not on the same page, we send conflicting messages to our providers which is a disservice. And if an auditor is not evaluating medical necessity and helping to educate providers about it, come 2021 they may not be very successful in their careers. The medical necessity and the value of care provided to the patient are the most important parts of documentation, and not all the EHR templates that create lots of noise and yield 18-page notes. That's just my perspective.




###

Questions, comments?

If you have questions or comments about this article please contact us.  Comments that provide additional related information may be added here by our Editors.


Latest articles:  (any category)

CMS and HHS Tighten Enrollment Rules and Increase Penalties
October 1st, 2019 - Wyn Staheli, Director of Research
This ruling impacts what providers and suppliers are required to disclose to be considered eligible to participate in Medicare, Medicaid, and Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP). The original proposed rule came out in 2016 and this final rule will go into effect on November 4, 2019. There have been known problems ...
Federal Workers Compensation Information
October 1st, 2019 - Wyn Staheli, Director of Research
When federal employees sustain work-related injuries, it does not go through state workers compensation insurance. You must be an enrolled provider to provide services or supplies. The following are some recommended links for additional information about this program. Division of Federal Employees' Compensation (DFEC) website Division of Federal Employees' Compensation (DFEC) provider ...
E-Health is a Big Deal in 2020
September 16th, 2019 - Chris Woolstenhulme, QCC, CMCS, CPC, CMRS
The new 2020 CPT codes are on the way! We are going to see 248 new codes, 71 deletions, and 75 revisions. Health monitoring and e-visits are getting attention; 6 new codes play a vital part in patients taking a part in their care from their own home. New patient-initiated ...
Chiropractic 2020 Codes Changes Are Here
September 9th, 2019 - Wyn Staheli, Director of Research
There are some interesting coding changes which chiropractic offices will want to know about. Are codes that you are billing changing?
Q/A: Is the Functional Rating Index by Evidence-Based Chiropractic Valid?
September 9th, 2019 - Wyn Staheli, Director of Research
Question Is the Functional Rating Index, from the Institute of Evidence-Based Chiropractic, valid and acceptable? Or do we have to use Oswestry and NDI? Answer You can use any outcome assessment questionnaire that has been normalized and vetted for the target population and can be scored so you can compare the results from ...
List of Cranial Nerves
September 3rd, 2019 - Find-A-Code
Cranial nerves are involved with some of our senses such as vision, hearing and taste, others control certain muscles in the head and neck. There are twelve pairs of cranial nerves that lead from the brain to the head, neck and trunk. Below is a list of Cranial Nerves and ...
So How Do I Get Paid for This? APC, OPPS, IPPS, DRG?
August 21st, 2019 - Chris Woolstenhulme, QCC, CMCS, CPC, CMRS
You know how to find a procedure code and you may even know how to do the procedure, but where does the reimbursement come from?  It seems to be a mystery to many of us, so let's clear up some common confusion and review some of the main reimbursement systems.  One of the ...



About Codapedia by InnoviHealth Systems Contact Us Terms of Use Privacy Policy Advertise with Us

Codapedia™ by InnoviHealth Systems™ - 62 E 300 North, Spanish Fork, UT 84660 - Phone 801-770-4203 (9-5 Mountain) - Fax (801) 770-4428

Copyright © 2009-2019 Find A Code, LLC - CPT® copyright American Medical Association