Coding an infected lumbar wound
HIM Connection, March 3, 2009
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to HIM Connection!
Q: I report ICD-9 code 876.1 for an infected lumbar wound. However, when I report this code, the insurance company will not process the claim without an accident date. What code should I report when the wound did not as the result of an accident but was instead due to a back surgery (e.g., lumbar laminectomy)? Is there another code that I should report that does not require an accident date?
A: ICD-9 code 876.1 denotes an open wound of back, complicated, indicating a current acute injury rather than a wound infection. This is why the payer requires an accident date. When the infected wound follows lumbar laminectomy, report ICD-9-CM code 998.59, posteropative wound infection.
Editor’s note: Paula Archer, RHIA, managing consultant at BKD, LLP, in Little Rock, AR, answered this question, which originally appeared in the February issue of Briefings on Coding Compliance Strategies.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to HIM Connection!
Related Products
-
2010 CDI Program Management Track: ACDIS Conference Audio Recording
This on-demand recording of the Program Management track from the June 2010 ACDIS conference in Chicago. The event featured...
-
2010 Clinical Chart Review Track: ACDIS Conference Audio Recording
This on-demand recording of the Clinical Chart Review track from the June 2010 ACDIS conference in Chicago. The event...
-
New CDI Initiatives and Ideas Track: ACDIS Conference Audio Recording
This on-demand recording of the New Initiatives and Ideas track from the June 2010 ACDIS conference in Chicago. The event...
-
ICD-10 Trainer
ICD-10 Trainer provides the latest news and updates related to ICD-10 regulations, and tips from HCPro experts and faculty...
-
5th Annual ACDIS Conference: San Diego, CA
Join us in 2012 for the Fifth Annual ACDIS Conference. This exciting event will continue the tradition of offering a diverse...
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