PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “CPT codes”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1992

New CPT codes: hospital, consultation, emergency and nursing facility services.

New evaluation and management codes were created by the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) Editorial Panel to ensure more accurate and consistent reporting of physician services. The new hospital inpatient codes describe three levels of service for both initial and subsequent care. Critical care services are reported according to the total time spent by a physician providing constant attention to a critically ill patient. Consultation codes are divided into four categories: office/outpatient, initial inpatient, follow-up inpatient and confirmatory. Emergency department services for both new and established patients are limited to five codes. In 1992, nursing facility services are described with either comprehensive-assessment codes or subsequent-care codes. Hospital discharge services may be reported in addition to the comprehensive nursing facility assessment. Since the 1992 CPT book will list only the new codes, and since all insurance carriers will not be using these codes in 1992, physicians are encouraged to keep their 1991 code books and contact their local insurance carriers to determine which codes will be used.

Ambulatory Care↗
PubMed1992

Proper CPT coding.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Fees, Medical↗
PubMed1992

CPT Codes for 1992.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Abstracting and Indexing↗
PubMed2026

Can ChatGPT Replace Human Clinical Coders? A Comparative Study in Otology Billing.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the utility of the large language model (LLM), ChatGPT, for the analysis of operative notes and the generation of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes in comparison to human clinical coders. STUDY DESIGN: CPT billing codes assigned by ChatGPT were compared to existing billing data. Otology practice within a tertiary academic center. METHODS: About 191 operative notes from a single surgeon (9/2022-10/2023) were analyzed. ChatGPT-3.5 and 4 models were prompted for CPT codes based on operative notes. Assessment included determining exact and partial match rates, sensitivity and specificity for targeted procedures, and work Relative Value Units (wRVU) differences between ChatGPT-generated and human-assigned codes. RESULTS: ChatGPT-3.5 achieved exact matches in 22% of cases and partial matches in 32%, while ChatGPT-4 achieved 14% exact and 33% partial matches. When cochlear implantation (CI) was excluded, performance dropped significantly. For CI, ChatGPT-3.5 demonstrated a sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 90%, while ChatGPT-4 showed a sensitivity of 96% and specificity of 92%. In contrast, performance on cartilage grafting was poor, with sensitivities of 4.2% for ChatGPT-3.5 and 0% for ChatGPT-4. ChatGPT-3.5 and 4 showed moderate CPT code matching accuracy among themselves, with slight agreement to human coders. Both models tended to underbill for wRVUs compared to human coders, with significant differences in the values generated. CONCLUSION: This study assessed ChatGPT's effectiveness in automating CPT code assignment for otologic surgeries. While the models achieved high sensitivity values for assigning codes related to cochlear implantation, both models struggled with complex cases, failed to apply modifiers, and often assigned fewer wRVUs. The findings highlight ChatGPT's potential in medical billing but indicate a need for further refinement.

Humans↗
PubMed1992

Predicting the work of evaluation and management services.

Physicians, carefully adhering to the definitions of Physicians' Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) billing codes, used the same CPT codes to denote evaluation and management services that varied widely in work and used different codes for services whose work was the same. As payment shifted to the Medicare Fee Schedule, it was important that the coding system be redefined so that codes consistently reflect the resource costs of these services. Redefining these codes for a resource-based payment system required an understanding of how verifiable predictors relate to physician work. Using data obtained from the Resource-Based Relative Value Scale (RBRVS) study regarding 377 services surveyed among physicians in 31 specialties, multiple regression analyses of the relationship of different variables to the mean values of work were performed. Intraservice time, which accounted for 90% of the variance, was the most important predictor of intraservice work. Specification of time, which previously had not been an element in the definitions of CPT codes for evaluation and management services, was useful in refining these codes so that their value corresponds more closely to resource costs. Other predictors of work were site of service or visit type, patient status (new/initial, established/subsequent), and referral status (consultation, nonconsultation).

Abstracting and Indexing↗
PubMed1992

Measuring the determinants of work values for psychiatrists' services in the resource-based relative value scale study.

OBJECTIVE: As part of the Harvard resource-based relative value scale study, the authors investigated how well the codes in the Physician's Current Procedural Terminology, 4th edition, or CPT-4, match psychiatric services to the work involved in evaluating and managing patients and how patient care characteristics affect different levels of psychiatric work. METHOD: A random sample of over 200 psychiatrists and subspecialists was asked to use 68 typical clinical examples or vignettes to evaluate services described by CPT codes. Data were analyzed by multivariate statistical methods. RESULTS: The survey showed that the existing coding system does not adequately describe the work that psychiatrists do. Within a single code (e.g., 90844, individual medical psychotherapy), there was wide (more than twofold) variation in the estimates, from multiple measurements based on different vignettes, of the amount of work represented. Estimates of work values varied significantly according to treatment setting and patient characteristics: psychiatric services in the hospital showed an average work value 25% greater than that for office services; treating new patients involved 18% more effort than treating established patients; and treating patients described as at risk of harming self or others increased the psychiatrists' work effort by 36%. CONCLUSIONS: Revisions in coding evaluation and management services in the new Medicare fee schedule for psychiatric services should be further refined and then implemented. These revisions would bring the coding system into line with psychiatric practice, making it a better way of accounting for the relative work involved in treating patients of varying difficulty.

Fee Schedules↗
PubMed1992

Coding and reimbursement of primary care biopsy and destruction procedures.

Current medical practice requires physicians to accurately report services provided to patients. Billing for destruction of benign and malignant lesions and for surgical, needle, and endoscopic biopsy procedures involves the selection of specific 1992 Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Payment for these procedures by third-party payers often requires the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) coding for neoplastic lesions. This review explains the proper codes to use in identifying common biopsy and destruction procedures performed by primary care physicians. The Health Care Financing Administration's relative value units and one state's published Medicaid payment rates are included for each procedure code. Instructions for selecting site-specific biopsy and destruction codes are provided.

Abstracting and Indexing↗
PubMed1992

Productivity of radiologists in the United States by imaging technique: a 16-year analysis based upon relative value units.

Professional Relative Value Units (RVUs) quantifying productivity of radiologists in the United States were used to study trends from 1973 to 1989 in the distribution of productivity among the various imaging techniques. Data from a 1989 survey were used to estimate the distribution of radiology examinations among techniques for 1989. A difficulty index (RVUs per examination) was calculated for each technique weighted by actual CPT-code occurrences reported in that survey. An RVU workload was estimated for each technique by multiplying the occurrences of the technique by its corresponding difficulty index. This analysis was applied first to the 1989 data, and second, retrospectively, to data from the literature that gave the distribution by technique of estimated national procedures for 1973 and 1980. The number of studies and RVUs in all techniques has increased from 1973 to 1989 with a relatively greater increase in the percentage of mammography and of sectional imaging examinations. Differences in difficulty index between the techniques leverage the changes in occurrence, causing a dramatic increase in the percentage of RVU workload represented by sectional imaging. The percentage of procedures and RVUs represented by vascular/interventional has remained relatively constant. The overall difficulty index has risen by 18% from 1973 to 1989. These trends should influence the allocation of space, equipment, and human resources in radiology department planning and management.

Diagnostic Imaging↗
PubMed1992

Reimbursement of biotherapy: present status, future directions--perspectives of the office-based oncology nurse.

Economic forces are stimulating cost sensitivity and the need for clinical efficiency in medicine. The federal government has led the way with Medicare reform, and cost-containment efforts are evident in all health care payer programs. More and more, the office-based oncology nurse is involved in reimbursement issues as both a colleague and a patient advocate. Creative solutions to the challenges of reimbursement require knowledge of the issues, familiarity with patient-specific therapies, and recognition of unique cost and billing issues. Biologic agents frequently used in office-based oncology practice are easy targets for reimbursement denials because of regulations against their investigational status, "off-label" use, method of administration, and relatively high cost. Such agents include interferon, erythropoietin (EPO), granulocyte and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF and GM-CSF, respectively), and interleukin-2 (IL-2). Reimbursement decisions are often characterized by inconsistency and uncertainty, and rulings are based not only on law, but also on interpretation. The need for clarification often opens a window for negotiation for the complex reimbursement issues associated with biotherapy. In addition to thoroughly determining cost and accurately assigning appropriate Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, office-based oncology nurses can pursue various strategies to help their patients and practices obtain reimbursement of biotherapy. Chief among these is educating third-party payers on the appropriateness and necessity of newer treatment modalities. In individual cases, documentation of the scientific data, clinical outcomes, and cost benefits supporting a treatment decision almost always gains reimbursement.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Cost Allocation↗
PubMed2026

Genetic Susceptibility to Incisional Hernia Evaluation of Hernia Polygenic Risk Scores.

OBJECTIVES: Incisional hernia (IH) affects 13-30% of people after abdominal surgery, resulting in substantial morbidity and costs. While clinical risk factors have been studied extensively, genomic risk for IH is incompletely understood. We aimed to evaluate the impact of polygenic risk scores (PRS) on IH risk prediction. METHODS: We created and evaluated three PRS for abdominal hernia, ventral hernia and latent hernia susceptibility for prediction of IH in an institutional biobank. The primary outcome was defined as the diagnosis or repair of an IH based on ICD-9/10-CM/PCS and CPT codes. Clinical covariates included age, sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking status, index procedure type, and perioperative surgical site infection. A phenome-wide association study (PheWAS) was performed to assess clinical associations with increased PRS. We then tested the ability of the PRS to improve prediction for IH by modeling clinical covariates with and without PRS in patients who underwent abdominal surgery. Model performance was assessed using 10 iterations of 5-fold cross-validation to estimate Brier scores and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), which were compared using cross-model Bayesian analysis of variance. RESULTS: In 55,809 subjects, assessed PRS was significantly associated with incisional, umbilical, and ventral hernia on PheWAS, with 1.19 greater odds of developing IH per 1-SD increase in PRS (95% CI: 1.13-1.25, P < 0.001). Of 9,909 subjects who underwent qualifying abdominal surgery, 706 developed IH. In this cohort, the latent hernia susceptibility PRS was associated with a 16% increased hazard of developing IH per 1-SD increase (HR 1.16; 95% CI: 1.07-1.26; P < 0.001). Compared to a predictive model using clinical covariates (Brier score = 0.047, 95% CI: 0.046-0.048; AUROC = 0.660, 95% CI: 0.653-0.666), addition of the PRS showed similar Brier score and AUROC estimates (Brier score = 0.047, 95% CI: 0.046-0.048; AUROC: 0.667, 95% CI: 0.661-0.673) at five years. Cross-model Bayesian analysis demonstrated >99% probability of practical equivalence when trying to detect a difference of &#x2265; 0.02. CONCLUSION: All three PRS for hernia were independently associated with IH, suggesting that genomic factors contribute significantly to IH development. However, none of the three PRS meaningfully improved clinical IH risk prediction in patients who underwent abdominal surgery. This suggests that clinical comorbidities and surgical techniques may be equally as important as genomic architecture.

Bayesian analysis↗
PubMed1992

A guide to the new office evaluation and management codes for 1992.

The new office evaluation and management codes require an understanding of definitions that have been recently created by the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) Editorial Panel. Code selection is based on seven components; the three key components are the history, the physical examination and medical decision making. Office visit codes are divided into five levels of visits, based on service. New-patient office visits require all three key components for any level visit; established-patient office visits require only two of the three components. The new office code descriptions were created to assist physicians in code selections. Only when counseling or coordination of care dominates the visit (e.g., more than 50 percent) is time to be considered a controlling factor. Physicians are urged not to code only from time descriptors. The 1992 CPT book will list only the new evaluation and management codes, deleting the old level-of-service codes. Physicians are encouraged to contact local insurance carriers to ensure that they will also be using the new codes in 1992.

Abstracting and Indexing↗