Append modifier -59 to ED injection with appropriate documentation
APCs Weekly Monitor, August 4, 2006
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to APCs Weekly Monitor!
Append modifier -59 to ED injection with appropriate documentation
QUESTION: A patient presents to the ED with a finger laceration (883.0). The physician repairs the wound (12001) and gives the patient an intramuscular injection (90772) of Ancef ®. The NCCI edits indicate that the injection (90772) is a component of the comprehensive procedure (12001). Is it appropriate to append modifier -59 to 90772?
ANSWER: On January 1, 2006, CMS released updated information indicating that providers could append modifier -59 to injections/infusions provided in the ED. From January through March 2006, NCCI edits were disabled for injections and infusions in the ED. Then, from April through June 2006, CMS resurrected the NCCI edits for injections and infusions with multiple combinations requiring the use of modifier -59.
But based on hospital feedback, Medicare decided to release a limited pair of NCCI edits for injections and infusions beginning with Version 12.1 of the outpatient code editor effective July 1, 2006. For more information, read Medlearn Matters article SE0635 at the CMS Web site: http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MLNMattersArticles/downloads/SE0635.pdf
Even with the elimination of the most common drug administration code pairs, hospitals continue to see a combination of codes that evoke NCCI edits involving injection(s) or infusion(s) with procedures and services provided on the same date of service. The example above is a common set of code pairs that require providers to append modifier -59 to 90772 in order to receive APC payment. Again, documentation must be present for the use of modifier -59.
Continue to monitor your internal claims scrubber technology, encoder logic, and personnel to ensure a complete understanding of the updates and requirements for drug administration code pairs and the current NCCI edits in order to achieve APC revenue integrity.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to APCs Weekly 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
- 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?
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- News and briefs: Oklahoma Osteopathic Association against residency bill change
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- 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
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Q/A. One injection code or two?
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- Identify modifiable risk factors to prevent patient falls
- Hospitals are not bound by InterQual criteria for determining patient status
- Searched