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

re: noncontributory,negative

  1. #1
    Question re: noncontributory,negative
    Medical Coding Books
    Can " no pertinent findings" be used instead of "noncontributory" or "negative"? I would like to know how other offices have the providers
    document. Thanks.

  2. #2
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,126
    Default
    I'm sooooooooooooo glad you posted this question. This is one of my top pet peeves! You're statment should be fine....I prefer "Patient denies any pertinent ___________(i.e. family history) associated with the current problem"

    We are transitioning into an EMR and I was very vocal about the "non contributory" statement. This statement is no longer an option.

  3. #3
    Default
    I heard or read somewhere that CMS is also working on eliminating "negative" as an option also. Has anyone else heard that??

  4. #4
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,126
    Default
    Is the phrase “reviewed and negative” acceptable as documentation of Past, Family, and Social History (PFSH)?

    The phrase "reviewed and negative" by itself would not be acceptable documentation of PFSH, as it does not indicate what was reviewed.

    A pertinent PFSH is a review of the history area(s) directly related to the problem(s) identified in the History of Present Illness (HPI). A complete PFSH is a review of two or all three areas, depending on the category of E/M services. A complete PFSH requires a review of all three-history areas for services that, by their nature, include a comprehensive assessment or reassessment of the patient.

    Resources

    CMS 1995 & 1997 E/M Guidelines - http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MLNEdWebGuide/25_EMDOC.asp
    Palmetto GBA E/M Help Center, located in "Articles":
    Ohio: http://www.PalmettoGBA.com/boh
    West Virginia: http://www.PalmettoGBA.com/bwv
    South Carolina: http://www.PalmettoGBA.com/bsc

  5. #5
    Location
    Milwaukee WI
    Posts
    4,466
    Default Stay AWAY from "noncontributory"
    I try to train my physicians to specifically state the negatives.
    e.g. There is no family history of bleeding disorders or cancer. The patient has had no previous surgeries. The patient does not smoke.

    IF the patient has completed the questionnaire in full, the physician CAN state: ROS and PFMS histories as per patient questionnaire, completed by patient and review by me this date. Pertinent positives are: (then they list whatever is positive, whether ROS or history).

    As for CMS eliminating "negative" ... think about this for a minute. There is no way they can eliminate the word "negative" or you'd never get a complete ROS (unless someone was REALLLLLY sick and has positive findings in 10+ systems). But I do think that simply stating "ROS negative" won't fly ... which systems were reviewed? (And I always ask my doc, "If all the systems were negative, why is the patient here?" - I work for surgeons, we don't do preventive visits.)

    F Tessa Bartels, CPC, CPC-E/M

  6. Talking "all "others" negative
    I recently attended a CMS seminar and they mentioned that they are considering doing away with the phrase "all others negative" in the ROS part of the history. (They are warning us now so we can prepare our providers.) According to the speaker it sounds as if the statement "all others negative" may not be accepted in the future but the providers can still perform the ROS and mention positive and NEGATIVE results and obtain a complete ROS. (I was under the impression by the speakers comments that there may be some doubt that the providers are truly reviewing all the systems in the ROS when they state "all others negative".) Just my thoughts.
    As far as how we try and educate our providers - we ask them to document the findings pertinent to why the pt. is being seen and if the medical necessity is there then it would be appropriate to review the "other" systems and indicate the positive, negative responses.
    Last edited by urologycoder; 10-02-2008 at 05:43 PM.

  7. #7
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,126
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by ucpa17109 View Post
    I recently attended a CMS seminar and they mentioned that they are considering doing away with the phrase "all others negative" in the ROS part of the history. (They are warning us now so we can prepare our providers.) According to the speaker it sounds as if the statement "all others negative" may not be accepted in the future but the providers can still perform the ROS and mention positive and NEGATIVE results and obtain a complete ROS. (I was under the impression by the speakers comments that there may be some doubt that the providers are truly reviewing all the systems in the ROS when they state "all others negative".) Just my thoughts.
    As far as how we try and educate our providers - we ask them to document the findings pertinent to why the pt. is being seen and if the medical necessity is there then it would be appropriate to review the "other" systems and indicate the positive, negative responses.
    I have heard the same...good point. It will be interesting to see how long it takes to implement this.

    Can I say "All other systems reviewed and are negative" when completing the review of systems?

    Answer: Unfortunately, the answer to this question is yes and no, depending upon your state's Medicare carrier. This shortcut is indeed contained in both the 1995 and 1997 E/M guidelines where it states:

    "Those systems with positive or pertinent negative responses must be individually documented. For the remaining systems, a notation indicating all other systems are negative is permissible. In the absence of such a notation, at least ten systems must be individually documented."

    Sorry to say that some Medicare carriers (like TrailBlazer) have said that they do NOT recognize this shortcut and will only give credit for each system listed. Check with your Medicare carrier before using this documentation shortcut


    http://emuniversity.com/FAQ/EMFAQ9.html

  8. Default Family History
    If the physician documents family history with a 0 and / through it, is that considered acceptable?

  9. #9
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    3,126
    Default
    Although your physician may state that this should be inferred or implied, I would still say no. I doesn't really tell me anything.

  10. #10
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Posts
    51
    Default Noncontributory/negative
    So are we saying "family history negative" is acceptable or unaccepable?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Rh negative without isoimmunization
    By pbslagter@yahoo.com in forum OB/GYN
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-01-2012, 09:09 AM
  2. ROS and "noncontributory"verbage
    By 1073358 in forum E/M
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-15-2008, 09:05 AM
  3. Ros Noncontributory
    By heatherwinters in forum Family Practice
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-29-2008, 07:46 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?

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.