Cigna bulletin boosts importance of good physician documentation
APCs Weekly Monitor, February 20, 2009
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to APCs Weekly Monitor!
A December 2008 bulletin from CMS carrier Cigna should add an extra impetus for reluctant physicians unwilling to document to a higher degree of specificity.
Documentation of the three elements of E/M—patient history, physician medical decision making, and the exam itself—is separate and distinct from documentation of medical necessity, according to the bulletin. In other words, carriers will deny physician payments for services, such as initial and subsequent inpatient visits, if the services aren’t supported by good documentation demonstrating the medical necessity of those visits.
Read more in CDI Strategies. Association of Clinical Documentation Specialists (ACDIS) members can read the complete article in the upcoming issue of CDI Journal. To become a member, call our customer service department 800/650-6787 or e-mail customerservice@hcpro.com.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to APCs Weekly Monitor!
Related Products
-
The Long-term Care Nursing Desk Reference, Second Edition
Long-term care nurses can rely on this authoritative reference daily. It is packed with practical, need-to-know resident...
-
The RUG-IV Conversion: Financial Implications for Your Facility
When RUG-IV takes effect on October 1-whether in part or in full-is your facility prepared for the financial and operational...
-
ICD-10 Trainer
ICD-10 Trainer is a bi-weekly e-newsletter with the latest tips from the experts about how to get ready for the new coding...
-
Nursing and Therapy Documentation in Long-Term Care:
Synchronize resident documentation across multiple disciplines to improve quality of care as well as protect your...
-
The How-to Guide to Home Health Therapy Documentation
Improve therapy documentation immediately with this one-of-a-kind book. This practical resource is the only product on the...
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
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Identify potential Medicaid RAC target areas
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- 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
- 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?
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- CHANGES COMING: Key differences in nationwide rollout
- Searched