Results 1 to 3 of 3

Diabetese coding

  1. Question Diabetese coding
    Medical Coding Books
    Hi all,
    I need help with coding secondary disease or condition with diabetese diagnosis. When the doctor documents "Type 2 diabetes with neuropathy" is it ok to code 250.60 and 357.2 or do I code 250.00 and 355.9. My question arose when I read the current Coding edge page 41. In the example, the doctor's documentation used the word "with" as a connecting or linking word between diabetic and neuroligical manifestation. However, I attended a coding education presented by INGENIX that stated the word "with" is not a connecting or linking word and that the provider must use "due to" or "diabetic neuropathy." Please help with clarification.

    Thanks,
    Hope

  2. #2
    Default
    I would query the MD for more details.
    Based on your recent seminar at INGENIX you cannot use "with neuropathy" 250.60 would not be an appropriate code because it points to neurologic manifestations. If it were "due to neuropathy" or "diabetic neuropathy" then 250.60 and 357.2 would be appropriate.
    Using code 25000"DM without complication, type II..." would not be appropriate either unless you know there are no complications.

  3. #3
    Location
    Columbia, MO
    Posts
    12,843
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by hope.bell View Post
    Hi all,
    I need help with coding secondary disease or condition with diabetese diagnosis. When the doctor documents "Type 2 diabetes with neuropathy" is it ok to code 250.60 and 357.2 or do I code 250.00 and 355.9. My question arose when I read the current Coding edge page 41. In the example, the doctor's documentation used the word "with" as a connecting or linking word between diabetic and neuroligical manifestation. However, I attended a coding education presented by INGENIX that stated the word "with" is not a connecting or linking word and that the provider must use "due to" or "diabetic neuropathy." Please help with clarification.

    Thanks,
    Hope
    If your read in the coding guidelines effective October 1 2010 you will see that the word with is now defined as indicating a causal relationship so it now means the same thing as due to:
    “With”
    The word “with” should be interpreted to mean “associated with” or “due to” when it appears in a code title, the Alphabetic Index, or an instructional note in the Tabular List.

    Debra A. Mitchell, MSPH, CPC-H

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?

Login

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.