• 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 your username or password use our password reminder tool. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
  • We're introducing new features and a new look to make the forums easier to use and more valuable to you. See what's new and let us know what you think!

Simple FB Removals

Messages
69
Best answers
0
Hi Coders,

My co-workers and I are in a little bit of a debate regarding simple FB Removals. It is to my understanding that to code a removal, documentation has to include the depth of penetration, technique used to perform the removal as it relates to irrigation, incision or dissection, and the location. This definition defines that there needs to be some sort of incision to code for the removal. HOWEVER...is it ok to use the simple FB removal codes for the nose(30300) and the ear(69200) for example if a 2 year old has paper in their ear or a marble in the nose removed by forceps/tweezers? Even if there is no incision?

Any insight would be wonderful. Thanks everyone.

Andrew
 

jimbo1231

Expert
Messages
370
Best answers
0
Ear, Nose

The marbe from the nose is fine. The ear depends on how the doc does it. If forceps are used , can code. If only irrigated most coding entities will not code.
As to basica documentation for FB removal, if it is subcutaneous te key issue is whether the physician incised to remove the foreighn body. However the other documentation is helpful, never hurts to provide specific documentation.

Jim S.
 
Top