Cloned E/M notes

December 29th, 2015 - Codapedia Editor
Categories:   Compliance   Evaluation & Management (E/M)   Medicare   Office of Inspector General (OIG)  

Have you ever read a physician office note and thought it was strangely familiar?  Or, not just familiar but identical to another note? Well, Medicare contractors have noticed the same thing, and the Office of Inspector General has included this on their 2011 Work Plan.

 Medicare contractors have noted an increased frequency of medical records with identical documentation across services.  We will also review multiple E&M services for the same providers and beneficiaries to identify electronic health records (EHR) documentation practices associated with potentially improper payments.  

Electronic health records (EHRs) have made it possible to copy and paste documentation from a previous visit, performed by the same or different provider.  It is easy to “bring forward” history, exam and assessments and plans documented at a previous note.  Sometimes, the record will say, “Reviewed, no changes required,” and sometimes, these sections are just dropped into the note, as if recorded on this day’s visit.  Clinicians must and should take advantage of the historical data stored in the medical record, and use shortcuts to save time.  However, only certain types of data should be carried forward into a progress note and with limitations.

 What’s the problem with copy and paste?  There are both clinical and compliance concerns with copy and paste.  Clinically, copying the history of the present illness from a previous visit performed by the same or different provider is inaccurate.  The history of the present illness should include the reason for today’s visit and a description of the patient’s symptoms since the last visit.  The HPI elements include location, severity, duration, quality, timing, context, modifying factors and associated signs and symptoms.  That is, how is the patient doing since last seen?  Is the treatment helping?  What does the patient say is the problem or reason for the visit?  This section of the note is unique to the present visit, and may never be copied and pasted from a previous note performed by that provider or another provider.

 The HPI and ROS contradict one another  This is a problem when the clinician enters a description of the patient’s problems, but the review of systems is either clicked as “normal” or copied from a previous visit when the patient did not have that complaint.  This is a too common problem in progress notes documented using an EHR.  It not only provides a confusing clinical picture for other physicians and providers who will treat the patient, it calls into question the validity of the entire history section.

 It just doesn’t make sense  For some notes, when the history section is copied from a previous note, the description of the patient’s symptoms and the timing just doesn’t make sense.  This is particularly true when copied from another clinician’s note or if a long time period has elapsed.

 But, can’t a clinician use the past medical history?  Yes, there is no reason that the past medical, social and family history cannot be carried forward from a previous note, as long as the provider reviews it with the patient.  This is a good use of an electronic health record.  Some specialties, such as oncology or cardiology, describe the course of the patient’s treatment since diagnosis, and include this in the HPI section.  Since the course of the treatment hasn’t changed, they want to copy it from a previous note.  Here’s how that looks:  “Patient diagnosed in 2008, with cell type XYZ, treated with radiation and three rounds of chemo. Then, in 2009….”  This historical data doesn’t change from visit to visit, and may be copied into any section the physician desires: the HPI or the past medical history.  (Auditors will count it as past medical history.)  However, in addition, the clinician should document the patient’s symptoms (or lack of symptoms) since last seen.  Are there side effects of treatment?  How is the patient feeling? Those are the elements of the history of the present illness, which may not be copied and brought forward from a previous note.

 Family history reviewed, unchanged   Great, if the clinician has done so.  But, if the section labeled family history is empty, what did the clinician review?  It calls into question the validity of all of the copied note.

 What about populating today’s note with the information from the last visit, to save time, and just updating it?   Dangerous.  Of course it is time saving, but it is too easy to forget to update or change one part.  I strongly urge clinicians not to populate today’s note with the information from the last visit.

 Guard against cloned notes in your practice.  If some part of the history is used from a previous visit, the provider must review it with the patient, and indicate that it is unchanged.  The Documentation Guidelines don’t give credit for “clicking” on reviewed.  The Guidelines state the history doesn’t have to be re-documented, not that the work doesn’t need to be done.  

 

 

###

Questions, comments?

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.


Latest articles:  (any category)

Compliance Billing: Power Mobility Devices
December 27th, 2022 - Chris Woolstenhulme
In May of 2022, the OIG conducted a nationwide audit of Power Mobility Device (PMD) repairs for Medicare beneficiaries. The findings were not favorable; the audit revealed CMS paid 20% of durable medical suppliers incorrectly during the audit period of October 01, 2018- September 30, 2019. This was a total of $8 million in device repairs out of $40 million paid by CMS. We gathered information in this article to assist providers and suppliers in keeping the payments received, protecting beneficiaries, and assisting you in ensuring compliance.
Leveraging Hierarchical Condition Category (HCC) Coding to Improve Overall Healthcare
December 27th, 2022 - Kem Tolliver
Diagnosis code usage is a major component of optimizing HCCs to improve overall healthcare. Readers will gain insight into how accurate diagnosis code usage and selection impacts reimbursement and overall healthcare.
Accurately Reporting Diabetic Medication Use in 2023
December 20th, 2022 - Aimee Wilcox
Along with the ICD-10-CM coding updates, effective as of October 1st, the guidelines were also updated to provide additional information on reporting diabetic medications in both the general diabetic population and pregnant diabetics. Accurate reporting is vital to ensure not only maximum funding for risk adjusted health plans, but also to ensure medical necessity for the services provided to this patient population.
REMINDER: CMS Discontinuing the use of CMNs and DIFs- Eff Jan 2023 Claims will be DENIED!
December 19th, 2022 - Chris Woolstenhulme
Updated Article - REMINDER! This is important news for durable medical suppliers! Effective January 1, 2023, CMS is discontinuing the use of Certificates of Medical Necessity (CMNs) and DME information forms (DIFs). We knew this was coming as the MLN sent out an article on May 23, 2022, but it is time to make sure your staff knows about these changes.
How Automation Could Impact the Future of Medical Coding
December 15th, 2022 - Find-A-Code
Automation is a fact of life in the modern world. As digital systems expand and mature, the creators of those systems are bringing more automation to more industries. Medical coding isn't the exception.
CPT Codes and Medicare's Relative Value Unit
December 13th, 2022 - Find-A-Code
A recently published study looking to explain income differences between male and female plastic surgeons suggests that billing and coding practices may be part of the equation. The study focused primarily on Medicare's relative value units (RVU) as applied to surgeon pay. But what exactly is an RVU?
Identifying the MEAT to Support Reporting Chronic Conditions in the Computer-Assisted-Coding (CAC) World
December 13th, 2022 - Aimee Wilcox
The benefits of computer-assisted-coding (CAC) are great and understanding how to engage with the engine to ensure maximum coding efficiency is vital to the program's success for your organization. But how do you know when to accept an autosuggested code and when to ignore it, especially when it has to do with historical patient data?



Home About Contact Terms Privacy

innoviHealth® - 62 E 300 North, Spanish Fork, UT 84660 - Phone 801-770-4203 (9-5 Mountain)

Copyright © 2000-2023 innoviHealth Systems®, Inc. - CPT® copyright American Medical Association