Go Back   AAPC Medical Coding & Billing Forums > Medical Coding > Gastroenterology

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 04-22-2009, 01:58 PM
coderguy1939 coderguy1939 is offline
True Blue
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 605
coderguy1939 is on a distinguished road
Default Colonoscopy - Diagnosis Linkage

I code for an ASC facility and I would like some input on the following coding scenario.

Pre-op DX: Screening
Post-op DX: Cecal polyp removed by cold biopsy, diverticulosis, internal hemorrhoids

Doctor did a colonscopy to the cecum and removed a polyp by cold biopsy. I'm coding 45380

My question revolves around proper DX linkage. In ICD-9 under Section IV Diagnostic Coding & Reporting for Outpatient Services under O. Ambulatory Surgery it states that "if the postoperative diagnosis is known to be different from the preoperative diagnosis at the time the diagnosis is confirmed, select the postoperative diagnosis for coding since it is the most definitive". However, if the patient has screening benefits, if you use 211.3 as the first-listed DX the patient's insurance carrier will often make the patient responsible for deductibles and/or co-pays. Screening benifits are often paid at 100%. Should the DX codes be coded:
1)V76.51 2)211.3 3)562.10 4) 455.0 and then only link DX codes 2,3& 4 to 45380? I'd appreciate hearing about how others are handling 3rd party payers. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-22-2009, 02:26 PM
Eena Eena is offline
New
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3
Eena is on a distinguished road
Default

See Coding Clinic, First Quarter 2004, page 11 to 12

It states to code the screening code first. The fact that the test is a screening exam remains, regardless of the findings or any procedure that is performed as a result of the findings.

Medicare, however, has a different rule.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-23-2009, 06:21 AM
coachlang3 coachlang3 is offline
Expert
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 485
coachlang3 is on a distinguished road
Default

Actually, stensven, that is Medicares rule. You show the screening dx as the primary dx.

However, Tricare and alot of private insurances (I'm finding this) don't want to see the conversion. They just want to see what was actually done. It gets more confusing every day with the private payors.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-23-2009, 08:01 AM
coderguy1939 coderguy1939 is offline
True Blue
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 605
coderguy1939 is on a distinguished road
Default

In the above scenario, Medicare directs you to use the screening code as the first-listed DX but to link the second DX, 211.3, to the procedure code. Blue Cross has recently instructed us to follow Medicares rules because patients were complaining that they were not getting to use their screening benefits. For non-Medicare patients, I have followed the ICD-9 guidelines as they pertain to ASCs, but patients want to use their screening benefits. Is this just a matter of coding it with the post-operative DX and dealing with the screening benefits issue on a case-by-case basis?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-24-2009, 07:34 AM
coachlang3 coachlang3 is offline
Expert
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 485
coachlang3 is on a distinguished road
Default

coderguy,

Regarding the case by case statement. Yes, that is exactly what I see happening with non-medicare payors (excluding BCBS, finally). The pt does have screening benefits but the payor has issues if they see it as a routine screening or if they see it started as screening but converted to a diagnostic. The payors will not pay the screeninig benefit if it converts and that is their right, but it stinks. How ethical is it for a doctor to leave a potentially cancerous polyp found and tell the patient after the screening, "hey, found a polyp, it might be cancerous but because your insurance won't pay under your screening benefit you're going to get whacked by a big ded and co-ins and we'll schedule a diagnostic colon at another time or you can just leave the polyp and hope your okay".

I'm sorry if I'm not putting it all into words correctly here. Personally I feel if the pt has a screening benefit and they come in for a screening and something is found they should pay at whatever Co-ins% or ded % they would have pd for a screening. If the screening is pd @ 100% pay the proc that was done at 100%.

It's not our fault that the ins co's have the whole auto accept/reject software and they don't want to have a real pair of eyes checking the claims.

As you can all tell, I have a real beef about this. Everyone but the payor gets the shaft here.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-24-2009, 08:40 AM
coderguy1939 coderguy1939 is offline
True Blue
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 605
coderguy1939 is on a distinguished road
Default

I understand your frustrations. It's strange that a simple procedure like this has so many coders trying to figure out how to apply coding guidelines. Thanks for your input.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




Disclaimer: Although AAPC staff members will monitor these forums periodically, we cannot be responsible for the information posted herein, nor guarantee its accuracy. Our members may discuss various subjects related to medical coding, but none of the information should replace the independent judgment of a physician for any given health issue. Please note that the opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of AAPC.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:59 PM.

AAPC - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2011, AAPCAd Management plugin by RedTyger