Is there a final list of the C codes that we will be able to use now that the codes are coming back? Are they the same ones as last year? Are the FI's ready for us to begin reporting them?
Compliance Monitor, February 20, 2004
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
According to the CMS website, C codes are used to identify and report pass-through devices, drugs, and services for hospitals under the hospital OPPS. The latest list of C codes can be found in the 2004 Alpha-Numeric HCPCS file. To download the file, click here.
C code updates can also be found in Addendum B of the OPPS Final rule for CY 2004, published in November, 2003. To view this and other updates to the OPPS for FY2004, click here.
Additionally, on December 19, 2003, Medicare published Transmittal 32, Change Request 3007, which provides a summary of changes for OPPS for calendar year 2004. Section 11 (page 12) indicates: "Hospitals are strongly encouraged to separately bill devices using a device category C code or other appropriate HCPCS code for implantable devices along with the charge for the device. Complete and accurate reporting of the codes and the charges for the devices is critical to ensuring that the relative weights for the services are accurate and thus for ensuring proper payment to hospitals for the procedures that use implanted devices."
All device category C codes for both current pass-through devices as well as packaged devices can be found on Addendum B on the CMS OPPS Web site. To view it, click here.
Devices, whether packaged or paid as pass-through devices, are reported using revenue codes: 272, 275, 276, 278, 279, 280, 289 or 624. To link to Transmittal 32, click here.
While, Transmittal 32, Change Request 3007 has an effective date of January 5, 2004, I recommend checking with your local Fiscal Intermediary as delays do occur.
This question was answered by Machelle Dunavant Shields, BS, CPC, CPC-H, CCS-P, MCS-P, Director, Reimbursement/Practice Management Services at Butler, Snow, O'Mara, Stevens and Cannada, PLLC.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Identify potential Medicaid RAC target areas
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- E-mailed
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- Q&A: Follow CMS' coding guidelines when using modifier -25
- 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
- Q/A. One injection code or two?
- Cohesive History and Physical Requirements
- Searched
