Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14

99213 vs. 99214 Thoughts?

  1. #1
    Default 99213 vs. 99214 Thoughts?
    Medical Coding Books
    Can you look at this Encounter, it is baffling me. Here it is:

    Pain location: Headache
    Pain Scale: 1
    Follow up on Headache and HTN.

    Allergies: Adhesive, Metformin, Ace Inhibitors

    He tried increasing metoproiol to 150mg bid with increase in HA noted. He called me by phone and I advised tapering metroproil down to current dosage of 50mg bid, which he has noted has helpd his HA to about 30 percent of prior severity. He said at it worst the HA feels like "a whack on the head." He does note that metropriol was also helpful in PVC Tx.

    His glycemic index is poor. Fasting glucose is is around 140, pm glucose is 120-140.

    Meds: Cozaar, Actos, Metroproli

    Phys Exam:
    GEn: Obese man in no distress
    HEENT: Temporal arteries nontender; Oropharnyx is benign.
    Lungs: Clear to asculation and percussion.

    IMpression: 1) Headache -- He is improved with with reduction of metroilol. Will continue to taper metroprioil by 50% every 10 days. Reacessment in a month.

    2) HTN -- See recommendations to taper off metroprioil. Reexam in a month.

    Initially, I got 99214. Det, exp, Moderate. What do you think?

  2. #2
    Everett, WA
    These are my thoughts and hoping the veterans will comment. I've worked it from the MDM backwards and have come up with a level 4 for this established patient.. Briefly you have MODERATE MDM due to the presenting problems of HA and HTN along with medication management. Not sure if the EXAM would be PF or EXP because I only count 5 items. Are you using 95 or 97 guidelines? (Doesn't really matter since the other two components will substantiate the level.) HPI contains the following elements: location, quality, severity and modifying factors which qualifies for an extended HPI + 2 bullets for ROS and PMH = DETAILED. Since you've met two out of 3 required components for an established patient, I would assign Level Four. Again, hoping others with credentials in this field will comment (and correct my thinking) as I have a keen interest in this area. ---Suzanne E. Byrum, CPC

  3. Default E/m-99214
    I agree with you. I'll append 99214 (for the specified documentation).

    Last edited by msrd_081002; 12-22-2010 at 01:22 AM.

  4. #4
    This is why I don't like the wishy-washy system of using both sets of guidelines - we can opt to the more generous one when it suits us? I prefer that boundaries be clearly laid out - there's less room for mis-interpretation. I wouldn't have assigned the exam as EPF, no matter how awesome it ranked on the "Some carriers will accept 2-9 systems" definition for an EPF exam. I mean, look at what he actually did during the exam - seriously. Get a mental image going. He walks in the room, and makes an observation about the man's weight and the fact that he's obviously not having an emergency at the moment (both of which are easily accomplished with a casual glance). He listens to the guy's chest, which is virtually routine, no matter why you see the doctor; and then gives the patient's face and neck a little pat-down. Exam? Check!
    He may have been more thorough than that, but without documenting it, we'll never really know. The notes indicate an extremely brief, definitely problem-focused physical exam - the more stringent guideline should be applied, in my opinion.

  5. #5
    Default 99213 vs. 99214
    I came up with a 99214, but felt strange about it. 1995 guidelines were used on this case, but it was audit of a doc that choose a 99212. My first impression was to advise a 99213, and if we work in Medical necessity, it will be a 99213; which is the over-riding factor. Good counters and many experienced coders would still get a 99214. THe only thing that is left is medical necessity.

    It would be a 99214 no matter which set of guidelines were used. Food for thought.

  6. #6
    Yes it would, since the patient's established. You've got a solid 99214, so don't sweat it.

  7. #7
    Smile Another Case: OV with EKG and X-ray
    Here is another scenario that is cause for thought and feedback....

    Medicare patient
    Sex; female
    Pain Scale: 4
    Pain location: Chest
    Surg Hx: Hysterectomy

    Allergies: Epinephrine, Furosemide, Tramadol

    Here for eval of chest pain. Hx of Coronary artery disease, RCA stenting in 2004. In the past week, she has had an onset of chest pain that began with a few twinges of pain lasting for a few seconds, underlying the left side. In the past few days this has increased to to involve sternal area as well. The pain does not feel like a pulling muscle. She took some Devocet with improvement of symptoms.

    She denies cough and dyspnea. There is no dysphagia or odynophagia. The pains are worse when lying on left side. No leg swelling. No calf pain or hemopytosis. She denies fever, chills, and PND.

    Current Meds: Cozaar, Plavix, and Darvocet

    Family Hx: Son and brother with MI; Mother with HTN.

    Social: She is a non-smoker.

    Phys Exam:
    General -- overweight, pleasant in no distress
    Neck: JVP not elevated
    Lungs: Clear to asculation and percussion. Respirations are unlabored. No chest wall tenderness.
    Cardiac: Rhythm is reg with normal S1 and S2 and 1/6 mid-systolic murmur at lower left sternal border. No radiation. JVP not elevated.
    Abd: soft and nontender. No mass. No aortic bruit.
    Extrem: Without edema. No calf tenderness.
    Chest: X-ray reviewed personally by shows normal heart size and clear lung fields. No change from 2005. EKG shows show normal sinus rhythm. rate 56, with no repolarization change. Toponin I is .03.

    IMPRESSION: Chest Pain. Suspect noncardiac pain, prob chest wall. Advised continued use of Darvocet. She was instructed in nitroglycerin use as trial. PHone follow in 48 hours. Possible Myoview test in future.

    My thoughts and questions: Can we code a EKG, for example, 93010? How about an Xray code? We have a partial EKG strip that has the doctor handwriting stating, "Normal EKG" and the doctor also signs the EKG strip machine strip and his interpretation. I feel that this is not enough to code a 93010 because we don't have the doc saying, "Interpreted by me" or anything like it. Bottomline: I would lean towards just a 99203 with 786.50.

  8. #8
    can someone give me the break down on how this is a 99214??? im looking and all i can get is a 99213


  9. #9
    Smile 99213 vs. 99214
    The breakdown is Detailed, Exp, and Moderate MDM. Why? It has 4 HPI, 2 ROS, which equals a Det. The Exam is very slight, so it makes a expanded exam. And, it is moderate MDM because the Doc change his meds and will further alter his prescription management. This is using 1995 Guidelines. Any thoughts?

    I had to look twice before I came up with a 99214. Strange case.

  10. #10
    Hold up. On the first case you have F/U for Headache and HTN, so these are both established problems and they are both stable so that is only 1 dx point each. Even with Moderate risk, you are stuck at low MDM.

    What are you counting for ROS?

    This would be a 99213 if I was auditing it.

    On the second, I would be ok with coding the review of the EKG but why are you not going to code the global code, who did the EKG? If it was done somewhere else it has probably already been interpreted, same as the x-ray, and therefore not billable by your provider, these would just be part of the MDM data points for your E/M.

    Just my take on it,

    Laura, CPC, CPMA, CEMC

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 99213 or 99214 - This is a follow up visit
    By cwilson3333 in forum E/M
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-24-2014, 02:51 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-24-2013, 10:30 PM
  3. 99214 vs 99213
    By kristy2 in forum Auditing General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-18-2011, 12:26 PM
  4. 99213 or 99214 - Patient has a comprehensive
    By gelebelegirl in forum E/M
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-30-2010, 05:57 AM
  5. 99213 or 99214?
    By MMAYCOCK in forum E/M
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-30-2010, 03:57 PM

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.