Results 1 to 4 of 4


  1. #1
    Casa Grande
    Default Ros
    Medical Coding Books
    A question has come up related to 95 DG regarding ROS. A provider states in note dated 8/10/09, "ROS are unchanged from previous visit. Details of this historical information is in the transcription of 8/3/09."

    The note from 8/3/09 gives 2 pertinent negative ROS. All other elements of history (HPI and PFSH) meet 99214. I am disagreeing with colleagues that the statement above does not meet an extended (detailed) ROS based on the other DG requiring 2 or more pertinent positive/negative ROS was documented for this visit (8/10). Am I completely off base? Thoughts??


  2. #2
    North Carolina
    The one problem I have seen with this method is that some ROS' have changed from the last visit and the current documentation leads you to believe it was reviewed. I see this, sometimes, with copying and pasting from the last visit. However....if the documenation supports 4 elements of HPI, 2 ROS, and 1 PFSH...then you have met a detailed history.

    A ROS and/or a PFSH obtained during an earlier encounter does not need to
    be re-recorded if there is evidence that the physician reviewed and updated
    the previous information. This may occur when a physician updates his or
    her own record or in an institutional setting or group practice where many
    physicians use a common record. The review and update may be documented
    • describing any new ROS and/or PFSH information or noting there
    has been no change in the information; and
    • noting the date and location of the earlier ROS and/or PFSH.

  3. #3
    Casa Grande
    Default Ros
    Thanks. Just to clarify, are you stating that the statement does not qualify as an extended ROS?

  4. #4
    North Carolina
    Since the note from 8-3 provides 2 ROS and the providers documentation acknowledges that he reviewed 8-3's entries and notated that nothing has changed...I would credit the ROS as extended. The 95 DG's state.."the patient's positive responses and pertinent negatives for two to nine systems should be documented" for an extended ROS.

Similar Threads

  1. Ros
    By valerie2424 in forum E/M
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-08-2015, 07:45 AM
  2. Ros
    By selsal in forum E/M
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-07-2011, 12:09 PM
  3. Ros?
    By ktden in forum E/M
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-03-2009, 07:54 AM
  4. ROS: see ROS from (other document)
    By renifejn in forum E/M
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-13-2009, 03:59 PM
  5. ROS Help!! What is proper language for ROS?
    By jvalntine in forum Medical Coding General Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-10-2009, 06:07 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Enjoying Our Forums?

AAPC forums are a benefit of membership. Joining AAPC grants you unlimited access, allowing you to post questions and participate with our community of over 150,000 professionals.

Join Now Continue Reading Without Full Access

Already a Member?


Close Message

In addition to full participation on AAPC forums, as a member you will be able to:

  • Access to the largest healthcare job database in the world.
  • Join over 150,000 members of the healthcare network in the world.
  • Be a part of an industry leading organization that drives the business side of healthcare.
  • Save anywhere from 10%-50% with exclusive member discounts on courses, books, study materials, and conferences.
  • Access to discounts at hundreds of restaurants, travel destinations, retail stores, and service providers. AAPC members also have opportunities to save on heath, life, and liability insurance.
  • Become a member of a local chapter and attend regular meetings.