Your interpretation of that code is correct and yes I have had it paid for with documentation showing why a second opinion was necessary for correct interpretation and does require an "invitation" from the original radiologist to state why they want the consultation. Medicare really does not like that code, but it can get paid if you have the fortitude and documentation to stick with it.
I was thinking Bill and the others were referring to the use of the 26 modifier after a radiologist has already provided and interpretation report.
- 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