Ensure proper coding in wake of hip/knee revisions
Compliance Monitor, June 14, 2006
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
The American Medical Association released the new ICD-9 procedure codes for revisions of hip and knee joint prostheses and new ICD-9 diagnosis codes for mechanical complications of joint prostheses effective October 1, 2005. Selecting which code to use depends on whether the procedure was an implantation or a revision.
Coders also must consider the type of implanted material (e.g., metal-on-metal, ceramic-on-ceramic, or metal-on-polyethylene) for hip implantations.
The easiest solution is to look for the implant logs in the record, which should contain a vendor sticker that describes exactly what type of prosthetic material was implanted. However, sometimes coders use unassembled or incomplete records, which leads to confusion.
"Whether it's defibrillators, stents, or joint replacements, the vendors have done a really good job with this, so [the sticker] ought to be in the record," says Bloomquist.
Also note that an error in the DRG grouper can cause improper assignment of higher-weighted DRG 471 (bilateral joint replacement) to a single joint revision instead of new DRG 545 (for revisions), says Bloomquist. This can happen if a coder selects two components (e.g., a patellar button and tibial liner). The current version of the DRG grouper assigns the two components to 471 rather than 545.
In response, Bloomquist says CMS is currently reviewing all claims with DRG 471 to make sure that it pays for true bilateral joint replacements and not revisions until it corrects the mistake in the DRG grouper next year.
Thanks to DeAnne Bloomquist, RHIT, CCS, chief consultant of Mid-Continent Coding, Inc., in Wichita, KS, and Sandy Sillman, RHIT, PAHM, diagnosis-related group (DRG) coordinator for Henry Ford Health System in Detroit for providing today's tip.
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
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Identify potential Medicaid RAC target areas
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- 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
- 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
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Q/A. One injection code or two?
- ED-to-inpatient transfers are flawed with safety gaps
- Searched
