Point system for Medical Decision Making

The Documentation Guidelines did not include a point system for medical decision making. The Guidelines describe three components of medical decision making.  

A picture is worth a thousand words: there is an audit sheet in the resources section of this article: print it out while reading this article.

The first is the number of diagnoses treated.  The guidelines assume that new problems to the examiner that need a work up are more complex than new problems that do not require a work up.  Also, that existing problems that are worsening or not responding to treatment are more complex than those that are better or stable or responding well to treatment.  

The second component of MDM is the amount of data to be reviewed. This includes ordering and/or reviewing diagnostic tests, reviewing and summarizing old records, obtaining history from someone other than the patient, discussion with a testing physician, and personally reviewing a tracing or image, (as opposed to reviewing the report of that test.)

The third component of MDM is the risk of complications, morbidity and/or mortality, what is commonly known as the table of risk.  The table of risk is divided into the risk of the presenting problem, the risk related to the diagnostic testing and the risk related to the treatment of the problem.  Any one item from the table of risk, in any of the three categories, determines the risk.  

There is a table in the Guidelines that shows us what level of each of the components is straightforward, low, moderate and high complexity.

The Marshfield Clinic developed a point system to help operationalize this section of the Guidelines, which are most open to interpretation.  These points are found on most audit sheets.  (And there is one attached to this article in the resource section.)

The Marshfield Clinic assigned points this way:

For the first component of MDM,  the number of diagnoses: minor or straightforward problems = 1 point, maximum of 2 allowed; stable problems =1 point; worsening problems =2 points; new problem to the examiner, no workup =3 points, one allowed; new problem to examiner with workup= 4 points.

For data: reviewing or ordering one or many lab tests =1 point; reviewing or ordering one or many x-rays =1 point; reviewing or ordering one or many medical tests =1 point; discussion with testing physician= 1 point;  decision to obtain old records = 1 point; reviewing and summarizing old records = 1 or 2 points, depending on carrier;  independently reviewing a tracing/image 1 or 2 points, depending on the carrier.

For the table of risk, 1 point is given for a presenting problem, diagnostic test or treatment that is minimal, 2 for low, 3 for moderate and 4 for high.  Look at the table of risk to see examples.

Two of the three complexity elements are required to meet the level of MDM, which are straightforward, low, moderate and high.

 

We constantly hear how AI is creeping into every aspect of healthcare but what does that mean for medical coders and how can we better understand the language used in the codeset? Will AI take my place or will I learn with it and become an integral part of the process that uses AI to enhance my abilities? 

Medical coding contractors offer a valuable service to healthcare providers who would rather outsource coding and billing rather than handling things in-house. Some contractors are better than others, but there is one thing they all have in common: the need to present some sort of value proposition in order to land new clients. As a contractor, your value proposition is the advantage you offer. And that advantage is specialization.

Chronic respiratory disease is on the top 10 chronic disease list published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Although it is a chronic condition, it may be stable for some time and then suddenly become exacerbated and even impacted by another acute respiratory illness, such as bronchitis, RSV, or COVID-19. Understanding the nuances associated with the condition and how to properly assign ICD-10-CM codes is beneficial.

According to the FDA, CDC, and other alphabet soup entities, the old COVID-19 vaccines are no longer able to treat the variants experienced today so new vaccines have been given the emergency use authorization to take the place of the old vaccines. No sooner was the updated 2024 CPT codebook published when 50 of the codes in it were deleted, some of which were being newly added for 2024.

With approximately 250,000 cases of acute appendicitis diagnosed annually in the United States, coding updates were made to ensure high-specificity coding could be achieved when reporting these diagnoses. While appendicitis almost equally affects both men and women, the type of appendicitis varies, as dose the risk of infection, sepsis, and perforation.

COVID vaccine changes due to the end of the PHE as of November 1, 2023 are addressed in this article.

2023 brought quite a few changes to Evaluation and management (E/M) services. The significant revisions as noted in the CPT codebook were welcome changes to bring other E/M services more in line with the changes that took place with Office or Other Outpatient Services a few years ago. As part of CMS’ Medicare Learning Network, the “Evaluation and Management Services Guide” publication was finally updated as of August 2023 to include the changes that took place in 2023. If you take a look at the new publication (see references below),....