PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10923576

Variability in code selection using the 1995 and 1998 HCFA documentation guidelines for office services. Health Care Financing Administration.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Documentation guidelines have been developed by the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) to promote consistent selection of physician evaluation and management (E & M) codes. Our goals were to determine whether medical providers and auditors agree in their assignment of office codes using 1995 and 1998 guidelines and to ascertain if the code levels assigned are affected by auditor experience and training. METHODS: A total of 1,069 established patient charts from private family physician offices were reviewed by a family practice faculty physician, a family practice resident physician, and a professional coder. The main outcome measures were the agreement between the auditors and the medical care provider on code selection and the degree to which documentation supported the code selected. RESULTS: All auditors agreed with the medical provider code selection in only 15.2% (1995 guidelines) and 29.2% (1998 guidelines) of visits. Professional coders were more likely than faculty physicians or resident physicians to agree with the code assigned by the medical provider (51.7% vs 40.7% and 39.6%, P <.001). Documentation adequately supported the most common office code selection, 99213, in 92.7% (1995) and 91.0% (1998) of the charts reviewed. Concurrence among all auditors was only 31.0% (1995) and 44.3% (1998). CONCLUSIONS: Interobserver differences exist in the assignment of E & M codes by auditors using both 1995 and 1998 HCFA guidelines. The 1998 documentation guidelines produce greater agreement among auditors. The documentation supported the level of code billed in the majority of established patient office visits.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

T J Zuber, C E Rhody, T A Muday, E A Jackson, S J Rupke, L Francke, W T Rathkamp. 2000. Variability in code selection using the 1995 and 1998 HCFA documentation guidelines for office services. Health Care Financing Administration.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10923576/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Compliance, satisfaction, and quality of life of patients with colorectal cancer receiving home chemotherapy or outpatient treatment: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare chemotherapy given at home with outpatient treatment in terms of colorectal cancer patients' safety, compliance, use of health services, quality of life, and satisfaction with treatment. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Large teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: 87 patients receiving adjuvant or palliative chemotherapy for colorectal cancer. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment with fluorouracil (with or without folinic acid or levamisole) at outpatient clinic or at home. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Treatment toxicity; patients' compliance with treatment, quality of life, satisfaction with care, and use of health resources. RESULTS: 42 patients were treated at outpatient clinic and 45 at home. The two groups were balanced in terms of age, sex, site of cancer, and disease stage. Treatment related toxicity was similar in the two groups (difference 7% (95% confidence interval -12% to 26%)), but there were more voluntary withdrawals from treatment in the outpatient group than in the home group (14% v 2%, difference 12% (1% to 24%)). There were no differences between groups in terms of quality of life scores during and after treatment. Levels of patient satisfaction were higher in the home treatment group, specifically with regard to information received and nursing care. There were no significant differences in use of health services. CONCLUSIONS: Home chemotherapy seemed an acceptable and safe alternative to hospital treatment for patients with colorectal cancer that may improve compliance and satisfaction with treatment.

Ambulatory Care↗

[Managing oncological patients. It can also be done on an ambulatory basis].

A consequence of an increasing tendency to manage oncological patients on an outpatient basis is that, apart from the care-providing oncologist, family doctors are also being involved. Only with the aid of adequate supportive measures is it possible to ensure treatment of such patients with the more intensive forms of therapy as chemotherapy or combined radiochemotherapy within their social environment. In addition to enteral and parenteral nutrition adapted to individual requirements, differentiated pain control is of major importance. Side effects of chemotherapy or radiotherapy often necessitate rapid intervention, and thus also short communication pathways between family doctor and oncologist. Joint efforts are also necessary when helping the patient cope with his/her disease.

Ambulatory Care↗