Wiki New EM guidelines more Complicated

Lyta2000

Networker
Messages
72
Location
Kernersville, NC
Best answers
0
Anyone else feel like the AMA just made everything so much more complicated? Why couldn’t they have removed history and exam and left the MDM section alone? Lab and radiology billing is different per office and these are details most providers we have wouldn’t know.
 
I purchased the webinar "So, the E/M Guidelines Changed. Now What?" After listening to the speaker, I was still confused and frustrated. What did help was the workbook the host provided after the webinar. It included all the questions asked by the participants and the presenter's rationales. I can't say I fully understand yet, but it is a little clearer. I will go over the workbook a few more times. With more scenarios and application of the definitions and instructions of the guidelines, I feel I will soon be able to say I understand. Not quite there yet, but hopefully soon. If the chance becomes available for you to purchase that webinar on demand, I would highly suggest doing it.
 
The 95/97 guidelines were subjective to a point, especially 95. But seasoned coders would generally come up with the same E/M for the same reasons and so there was uniformity in coding. We were told that the old MDM guidelines needed to be "tweaked" since the same MDM would point to more than one E/M at times which is understandable. But what started out as a bit of a "tweak" became an all out overhaul! It was so difficult to apply the new rules that they already released an "updated" set of rules to "spell out" all the confusing parts of the new guidelines. Bottom line, there will be far less continuity and congruency with the new guidelines than before. The AAPC polled coders about the change and how "confident" they were with the new GL. Round numbers were that 75% knew that they were not confident in assigning E/M levels yet. Makes me wonder about the other 25%. Are they really assigning codes accurately, or just think they are?
 
Last edited:
Top