• If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ & read the forum rules. To view all forums, post or create a new thread, you must be an AAPC Member. If you are a member and have already registered for member area and forum access, you can log in by clicking here. If you've forgotten the password it can be reset on our sign in section by entering your registered Email Address or Username here. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below..

Wiki B97.89

Create Wiki
B

bkudsk

Guest
Messages
25
Location
Winona, MN
Best answers
0
Provider coded J06.9 Viral URI as first listed. B97.89 was secondary which is correct. But no test was done to determine the virus. Question is: Is B97.89 a known viral agent?
 
So just to be clear on this matter of B97.89, If the doctor only states "viral URI" for example, without any further documentation on what the virus is, then would it be appropriate to code B97.89 which states "other viral agents as the cause of diseases classified elsewhere"? To me, stating other would mean that the documentation would need to specify what the other viral agent was. My thinking is that it should be only coded as J06.9, as that category does not even indicate to use the additional B95-B97 code. Does anyone else have an opinion on this matter?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top