Revenue code edit in the OCE?
Medicare Weekly Update, September 16, 2008
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Medicare Weekly Update!
As you can see by the number of items reported below, CMS was busy last week. One of the documents issued by CMS last week was a transmittal providing the Integrated Outpatient Code Editor (I/OCE) specifications for the third quarter. CMS typically reissues the I/OCE specifications with changes every calendar quarter. It is important that hospitals closely review each I/OCE transmittal. The revisions often require hospitals to make operational changes in order to remain in compliance with CMS billing requirements.
One thing that is interesting about the October I/OCE specifications is the addition of a new edit (edit #79) titled “Incorrect billing of revenue code with HCPCS code.” Edit 79 will result in claims being placed on RTP (“return to provider”) status.
Historically, CMS has been fairly flexible with respect to the assignment of revenue codes. In most cases, CMS allows hospitals to select whatever revenue code will result in an accurate matching of billed charges to costs as reported on the cost report. Consequently, at first blush, this new edit seems very significant.
However, if you study the transmittal carefully, you will find some additional information buried in Appendix M of the transmittal (page 43) indicating that the application of edit 79 is limited to the following billing scenarios:
- Revenue code 381 with HCPCS other than packed red cells (P9016, P9021, P9022, P9038, P9039, P9040, P9051, P9054, P9057, P9058), or
- Revenue code 382 with HCPCS other than whole blood (P9010, P9051, P9054, P9056).
So, as it turns out, this new edit is not nearly as broad as its title suggests.

Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Medicare Weekly Update!
Comments
0 comments on “Revenue code edit in the OCE? ”
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Identify potential Medicaid RAC target areas
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- Q&A: Acute respiratory failure diagnosis does not require intubation
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- E-mailed
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- Oxygen Cylinder Storage Requirements
- Q&A: Follow CMS' coding guidelines when using modifier -25
- Understand the spine to code back procedures correctly
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Searched
