Medical necessity isn’t medical decision making

Have you heard of Talk Ten Tuesdays? It’s an internet radio program hosted by Chuck Buck and Dr. Erica Remer, and every week they discuss current coding issues. They started with the implementation of ICD-10 and just kept going.

I was a guest recently and discussed one of my pet peeves: equating medical necessity with medical decision making, and payers requiring MDM to be one of the key components. I guess that’s two pet peeves. I know some of you disagree with me and reasonable people can disagree and still be friends and colleagues.

You can listen to the podcast here:

https://www.icd10monitor.com/copy-of-unraveling-the-mystery-of-ob-coding

And, here’s a reprint of the article I wrote for them:

---

Written for Talk Ten Tuesday, Feb. 6, 2018
by Betsy Nicoletti, MS, CPC
www.CodingIntel.com

When payers and coders down code E/M notes based on medical necessity, how do they determine what level of history and exam are medically necessary for a particular presenting problem?  Subjectively.

What is medical necessity?

Of course, in order for any medical service to be paid it must be medically necessary.  The AMA defines medical necessity this way:

“Health care services or products that a prudent physician would provide to a patient for the purpose of preventing, diagnosing or treating an illness, injury, disease or its symptoms in a manner that is: (a) in accordance with generally accepted standards of medical practice; (b) clinically appropriate in terms of type, frequency, extent, site, and duration; and (c) not primarily for the economic benefit of the health plans and purchasers or for the convenience of the patient, treating physician, or other health care provider.” [1]

But, medical necessity in an E/M service is like beauty. It is in the eye of the beholder.

The medical necessity for ordering an EKG or CT scan of the brain is clearly listed in medical policies. If the patient is going to have a blepharoplasty, there are clear diagnostic indications to separate out cosmetic from medically necessary services.

Neither Medicare nor the AMA nor any payer has developed guidelines that describes the medical necessity for performing a specific level of history or exam for a particular presenting problem. If a clinician documents a detailed history and a detailed exam, should a payer or coder say that that wasn’t needed?

Problems in coding and reimbursement

A coder wrote to one of my colleagues recently and said. “The insurance company told me that even though the visit met the requirements for 99215 they were down coding it to a 99214 because it only had moderate complexity.”

And a week before that a physician wrote to me and said “my coding department down coded my 99215 visit even though I had documented 45 minutes. The coder told me that despite the time, it didn’t meet medical decision-making.”

Recent listeners probably heard about the Highmark decision, since then rescinded, communicated to medical practices in a document called “Today’s Message.”

Highmark announced in big capital letters “Highmark to require providers to prioritize medical decision-making with complexity of history and exam when reporting established E/M  services.”  Why did they do that? They say it was based on their interpretation of the 1995 and 1997 guidelines.

Their interpretation is dead wrong.

What justification do payers and coders give when they down code visits when the history and exam support the level of service?

They base it on a quote from the Medicare claims processing manual that says that the medical necessity is the overarching criterion in selecting a level of service, not the volume of documentation. Let’s hold on to that thought.  Medical necessity is the overarching criterion.

Medical decision making and the Documentation Guidelines

The Documentation Guidelines were developed in 1995 and 1997 as a joint work product of Medicare and the AMA. The guidelines state that for established patient visits and some other visit types two of the three key components of history, exam, and medical decision-making must be met.

Neither CPT^® nor CMS said that medical decision-making must be one of those key components. The quote from the Medicare claims processing manual states that there must be medical necessity for the level of service, not that medical decision-making must be one of the key components.

Medical necessity is not synonymous with medical decision-making and medical decision-making should not be used as a stand in for medical necessity.

Over-documentation and copying and pasting

Of course, our electronic health records have resulted in some medically unbelievable notes. I don’t deny it.

I’ve been known to ask “Did you need to do a mirrored exam of the larynx for this child with an earache?” “Is it usual to do a comprehensive exam for a patient with a sprained ankle?’

But developing medical policies that are based on outliers in medical documentation is the wrong solution.

The correct solution

1. follow the guidelines and
2. let the medical director deal with outliers

Revenue and compensation

Many physicians are paid based on the relative value units (RVUs) associated with a CPT^® code. Coders and payers that arbitrarily down code visits based on an incorrect interpretation of the guidelines cost the organization or practice money, and the doctor salary.

The medical necessity for performing history and exam are determined by the nature of the presenting problem, the patient’s own personal history and the clinical judgment of the provider.

Medical decision-making, the number of problems treated and their status, data ordered or reviewed and the risk associated with the problem diagnostics or treatment is formulated as the outcome of the history and exam needed for that problem for that patient.

Medical decision-making is the result of the history and exam and is not a substitute for medical necessity. If CMS had wanted medical decision making to be that substitute, then the Medicare Claims Processing Manual would read, “medical decision-making is the overarching criterion in selecting an E/M service” instead of medical necessity.

If CMS had wanted medical decision making to be a substitute for medical necessity than either medical decision-making would be required in determining the code or all codes would require all three components.

[1] Statement of the AMA, January 14, 2011, accessed February 3, 2018 http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/8D03963CAEB24450947C1AEC0CAECD85.ashx