Both the 95 (p 12) and 97 (48) guidelines describe the review of test results by another physician as an indicator of increased complexity.
However both also state "review of lab, radiology and/or other diagnositic tests should be documented." One example in both is "WBC elevated." Clearly this would be a review of data not previously interpreted by a physician.
The fine point being that neither guideline addresses the inherent complexity of the test being reviewed.
So if that is the case, it should receive a point. But I would qualify that by stating that documentation should clearly demonstrate how reviewing this test affected the final treatment plan. That way it doesn't just show up in one area and disappear throughout the rest of the documentation.
Anyway, my two cents.....
- ICD-10 Trainings
- Comprehensive Courses
- CPC (Certified Professional Coder)
- COC (Certified Outpatient Coder)
- CIC (Certified Inpatient Coder) NEW!
- CRC (Certified Risk Adjustment Coder) NEW!
- CPB (Certified Professional Biller)
- CPMA (Certified Professional Medical Auditor)
- CDEO (Certified Documentation Expert – Outpatient) NEW!
- CPPM (Certified Physician Practice Manager)
- CPCO (Certified Professional Compliance Officer)
- VIEW ALL CERTIFICATIONS
Coding / Billing Solutions
- Audit / Compliance Solutions
Job Experience / Apprentice Removal
News / Discussion
- Other Resources
- Book Store
- Log In / Join