In 2007, CPT® added two codes for anticoagulant management, 99363 and 99364. The codes are meant to be used by physicians and Non-Physician Practitioners (NPPs) who manage a patient's warfarin therapy on an outpatient basis, reviewing the PTINR, adjusting the patient's dosage as appropriate, and communicating with the patient. The initial management is for a 90 day period, and must include at least 8 INR measurements. The second code is for subsequent 90 days of therapy, and must include at least 3 INR measurements.
The codes are not to be used to report the work of an E/M service or care plan oversight.
Unfortunately, CMS assigned the codes the status indictator of B for bundled. This means, you will not be reimbursed by Medicare if you report these codes. You may not bill a Medicare patient for these services, whether or not you have the patient sign an ABN, because you cannot bill a patient for bundled services.
These codes may be used for commercial payers. Their payment policies will vary, of course.
Why are there CPT® codes with no payment? The AMA develops CPT® codes based on services physicians are providing. Physicians request new codes to describe the services they are doing, through a formal process described at the beginning of the CPT® book. CMS then develops payment policies, independently of the AMA. In this case, CMS's policy does not allow carrier's to pay for the service.
If you have questions or comments about this article please contact us. Comments that provide additional related information may be added here by our Editors.
CMS pays emergency department visits through a payment method using Ambulatory Payment Classifications (APCs). Most payers also use the APC reimbursement system; however, there may be some differences in payer policies (always review your specific payer policy). APCs are the primary type of payment made under the OPPS, comprising groupings ...
It has been said that the healthcare industry is notoriously slow in terms of technology adoption. One need only look at how convoluted medical coding and billing are to know that it needs a technology injection. Specifically, medical coding and billing software desperately needs artificial intelligence (AI).
Attention providers, suppliers, billers, and vendors who bill Durable Medical Equipment (DME) to Medicare! Currently, a supplier receives a signed Certificate of Medical Necessity (CMN) from the treating physician or creates and signs a DME Information Form (DIFs); these are required to be sent with the claim.
However, this is about ...
Your practice has utilized the same medical billing software for years. The medical billing staff says it is time for a change. You don't necessarily disagree, but you also don't know where to begin your search for new software. There are so many vendors offering so many products that making sense of it all can be challenging.
Each year CMS publishes an Advance Notice of the upcoming years Medicare Advantage (MA) Capitation Rates and Part C and Part D Payment Policies and asks for comments related to it. Each of the comments are carefully reviewed and responded to and often are impactful to changes seen between the Advance Notice and final publication referred to as the Rate Announcement. With health equity as a primary focus for 2023, CMS announced some policy changes that may impact your organization.
Medicare Advantage Organizations (MAOs) have gone back and forth on whether or not to use data collected from telehealth, virtual Care, and telephone (audio-only) encounters with Medicare beneficiaries for risk adjustment reporting, but the following published documents from CMS cleared that up once and for all by providing an answer to a question specifically related to this question.
We’ve seen a number of OIG risk adjustment data validation (RADV) audits recently where the independent review contractor was simply looking for any codes the payer reported that were not supported by the documentation, in an effort to declare an overpayment was made and monies are due to be repaid. However, it was refreshing to read this RADV audit and discover that the independent review contractor actually identified HCCs the payer failed to report that, while still resulting in an overpayment, was able to reduce the overpayment by giving credit for these additional HCCs. What lessons are you learning from reading these RADV audit reports?