A patient was in the ER with a nose bleed, a packing was placed 30905 and pt was discharged. The pt returned later in the day because of reoccuring epsitaxis and packing was removed and and a new one was replaced. It is correct to code the subsequent 30906 charge for the second packing even if it occured on a separte visit?
-
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 epsitaxis
- Thread starter ldkennedy
- Start date
1formissy
Guru
Correct, because 30906 is subsequent.
Shaik.Arafath
New
query
A patient was in the ER with a nose bleed, a packing was placed 30905 2 days before, and pt was discharged. The pt returned today because of reoccuring epsitaxis and packing was removed and and a new one was replaced. It is correct to code the subsequent 30906 charge for the second packing even if it occured on a separte visit after 2 days??
A patient was in the ER with a nose bleed, a packing was placed 30905 2 days before, and pt was discharged. The pt returned today because of reoccuring epsitaxis and packing was removed and and a new one was replaced. It is correct to code the subsequent 30906 charge for the second packing even if it occured on a separte visit after 2 days??