AAPC - Back to school
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Cardio Cath Injection Documentation Requirement

  1. #1

    Default Cardio Cath Injection Documentation Requirement

    AAPC: Back to School
    The technicians print an automatated cath report from the cath lab and some of the cardiologist would like us to code directly from that report for injection codes 93544 & 93545 instead of these injections being dictated in their procedure notes. Our outside auditor states that since there are no specific format guidelines for procedures it is okay to code from this tech generated report as long as there is clear information in this record that injections were performed. Our concept is that this is a basic documentation guideline issue and since our guidelines state what isn't documented by the physician didn't happen then we are in disagreement. This is not a shared visit or incident to situation. Does anyone know where I may find a guideline that states ithe physician must document the entire procedure?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Louisville, KY


    Here's a suggestion: have the physicians (if they want coders to use the Tech Report/Nurse Report, etc) to sign that report and it can be used for coding purposes--by my understanding. You might also have them refer to that report in their dictations. I believe either would serve the purposes of solving the "disagreement" you speak of.

    As for where there's a guideline, I'm not sure you really need one. From a compliance perspective I can understand the concerns, but if you're coding for the professional component, it is concluded that you would only be utilized records that relate to the professional record (that created by and maintained by the physician).

    However, you may wish to visit the ACR website at www.acr.com or the Society for Interventional Radiologists because they may have something stated in terms of clinical and medical practice guidelines--although I doubt that's what you're asking for in this situation. If the physician signs a record--even when someone else may be acting as his/her scribe--that record is considered his/her formal record (or at least part and parcel to the record).

    Just my suggestions. I believe your auditor is being prudent, but not very visionary.

    Good luck.
    Kevin B. Shields, RHIT, CPCO, CCS, CPC, COC, CCS-P, CPC-P, CPC-I

  3. #3


    Thank you for responding . Still have a few questions...Is your answer the same if you are only performing physician based coding and not coding for the hospital? In these cases the technician is not acting as a scribe and is an employee of the hospital not the physician's office. It is my understanding that a scribe is employed by the physician. Do you know if this is correct?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Louisville, KY


    It is not longer a "technician's" record if the physician signs on the bottom; by signing, the physician is attesting that what is written is correct.

    To my knowledge it would make no difference, if you have that signature.

    If anyone has information that recommends something different, please post it here. In the meantime, I'll poke around to see what I can obtain in terms of commentary.

    Good luck!
    Kevin B. Shields, RHIT, CPCO, CCS, CPC, COC, CCS-P, CPC-P, CPC-I

  5. #5


    I was told by our CMD for Noridian that the technichian reports are NOT acceptable documentation for coding/billing.

    Bea Olsen, CPC, CCAT
    Last edited by beasname; 11-08-2007 at 11:56 AM. Reason: add name

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Louisville, KY


    Those reports are not suitable--if they're unreviewed by the physician. However, just as with an "incident to" scenario, if the physician reviews and agrees or adds addendums to the material, it is therefore his/her signature that makes the difference between a viable note versus a useless one.

    In and of themselves, the notes cannot be considered "billing material;" used in conjunction with the actual physician operative/procedure report, I see no reason those documents would not serve to substantiate the service.
    Last edited by kevbshields; 11-09-2007 at 07:45 AM. Reason: .
    Kevin B. Shields, RHIT, CPCO, CCS, CPC, COC, CCS-P, CPC-P, CPC-I

Similar Threads

  1. cardio cath help please
    By coding4fun in forum Cardiology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-25-2014, 01:00 PM
  2. Auditing -documentation requirement
    By fami in forum Auditing General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-21-2011, 09:43 PM
  3. KOH Documentation Requirement
    By wicoder in forum Dermatology
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-09-2011, 08:00 AM
  4. Documentation requirement for 99217
    By Mindy Davis in forum Emergency Department
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-08-2010, 12:37 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.