Tip: Stay on top of common coding pitfalls
Recovery Auditor Report, December 24, 2008
Although coding denials did not remain the focus by the end of the demonstration project, and medically unnecessary settings appeared to have taken its place, accurate coding will continue to be one of the areas the permanent RACs will review as part of their continuing audits. Therefore, a good proactive program that ensures accurate coding and appropriate medical settings and services is essential.
The DRGs/procedure codes listed below were the most frequently cited for coding errors:
-
DRG 186–187—Pleural effusion with complication/comorbidities(CC) or major CC (MCC)
-
86.22—Debridement
-
DRG 813—Coagulation disorders
-
DRG 870–871—Septicemia
-
54.51 and 54.50—Lysis of adhesions
-
DRGs 981–989—For operating room procedures unrelated to the principal diagnosis
The DRGs listed below were most frequently associated with medical necessity and one-, two-, and three-day admissions denials:
-
DRG 551—Medical back problems
-
DRG 313—Chest pain
-
DRGs 377–379—Gastrointestinal hemorrhage with MCC, CC or without CC/MCC
-
DRGs 640–641—Nutritional and miscellaneous metabolic disorders with MCC or without MCC (e.g. dehydration)
-
DRG 291–293—Heart failure and shock with MCC, with CC or without CC/MCC (e.g. congestive heart failure)
-
DRG 689–690—Kidney and urinary tract infections with MCC or without MCC
-
DRG 682–684—Renal failure with MCC, with CC or without CC/MCC
-
DRG 811–812—Red blood cell disorders with MCC or without MCC
-
DRG 286–287—Circulatory disorders except AMI, with cardiac catheterization with MCC or without MCC
-
DRG 264—Other circulatory system operating room procedures
-
DRG 190–192—Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with MCC, with CC or without CC/MCC
-
DRG 166–168—Other respiratory system operating room.procedures with MCC, with CC or without CC/MCC (e.g. transbronchial lung biopsy)
-
DRG 222–227—Cardiac defibrillator implantations with or without cardiac catheterization
This list is not all-inclusive. Any DRGs, diagnoses, procedure codes, or medical necessity issues that have been identified as problems for the hospital should be included in proactive reviews for documentation improvement and consistent coding compliance.
Editor’s note: This tip is excerpted from HCPro, Inc.’s new book, The HIM Director's Guide to Recovery Audit Contractors, by Jean S. Clark, RHIA. For more information on the book, click here.
Comments
0 comments on “Tip: Stay on top of common coding pitfalls ”
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Note from Hugh
- Depressing Leapfrog scores haunt hospitals
- Q/A: How should we report irradiated blood products?
- 2014 SNF Proposed Rule Analysis: Revising and rebasing the SNF market basket
- Reminder: MDS correction policy to be updated effective May 19
- Ask the expert: BIMS assessment
- Advanced practice nurses shouldn’t be left behind in meaningful use journey
- CMS issues transmittal to update the Medicare Provider Reimbursement Manual
- Report: Nearly 10 percent of patients have C.diff at admission
- CMS corrects edit 84, deletes modifiers
- E-mailed
-
- Georgia hospitals scrambling to create residency positions
- Q/A: How should we report irradiated blood products?
- CMS looking for comments on molecular pathology payments
- Tip of the week: Build a successful website to impress candidates
- Applying multiple procedure payment reductions to therapy cap amounts for Critical Access Hospital (CAH) claims
- Don't burn those ICD-9-CM Manuals just yet
- Joint Commission seeks input on behavioral health home certification
- Report: Nearly 10 percent of patients have C.diff at admission
- Depressing Leapfrog scores haunt hospitals
- HCA initiative boosts flu shots among hospital workers
- Searched
