e + m

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

bedrock

Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
8,108
Reaction score
5,878
I admit that I’ve been using the previous e/m standards when billing which isn’t great. Cigna decided this week to start regularly audit e+m codes nationwide. 10% of our practice is Cigna so it’s important I don’t get burned here.

Can someone help me with a very simple list of bullet points of the most recent revision in e+m billing guidelines that I need to include with documentation for e+m codes on level 3, 4, 5 on new and f/u patients?
 
see attachments
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2025-07-15 at 9.21.15 PM.png
    Screenshot 2025-07-15 at 9.21.15 PM.png
    397.1 KB · Views: 117
  • Screenshot 2025-07-15 at 9.21.23 PM.png
    Screenshot 2025-07-15 at 9.21.23 PM.png
    410.3 KB · Views: 116
I admit that I’ve been using the previous e/m standards when billing which isn’t great. Cigna decided this week to start regularly audit e+m codes nationwide. 10% of our practice is Cigna so it’s important I don’t get burned here.

Can someone help me with a very simple list of bullet points of the most recent revision in e+m billing guidelines that I need to include with documentation for e+m codes on level 3, 4, 5 on new and f/u patients?
1: Dude, it's been 4 years.
2: You're in for some pleasant surprises. The new EM format is so much better than the old one, and there's so much less documentation required. ROS doesn't matter at all anymore. You don't need to document crap like onset, timing, etc for the sake of billing. It's really a nice change. You just need to wrap your head around the "best 2 out of 3 column" concept. Pain is easy though. You will almost never use column 2, so you can just focus on maxing 1 and 3.
 
1: Dude, it's been 4 years.
2: You're in for some pleasant surprises. The new EM format is so much better than the old one, and there's so much less documentation required. ROS doesn't matter at all anymore. You don't need to document crap like onset, timing, etc for the sake of billing. It's really a nice change. You just need to wrap your head around the "best 2 out of 3 column" concept. Pain is easy though. You will almost never use column 2, so you can just focus on maxing 1 and 3.
Never use column 2? I always review data and or order data to meet a level 4. “Independent interpretation of MRI or X-rays” all day long
 
easiest, but is it appropriate?

the benchmarks suggest that around half of our coding should be level 3s.

it doesnt sound like that is what some people on this forum are doing.

ortho apparently does 51-60% level 3s.

noninvasive cardiology is 53-64% level 4s.


i dont have MGMA access.

 
easiest, but is it appropriate?

the benchmarks suggest that around half of our coding should be level 3s.

it doesnt sound like that is what some people on this forum are doing.

ortho apparently does 51-60% level 3s.

noninvasive cardiology is 53-64% level 4s.


i dont have MGMA access.

Ortho also has high productivity cases and don’t have to care about documenting well to meet level 4s to pick up the crumbs. Can’t comment on cardiology.
 
easiest, but is it appropriate?

the benchmarks suggest that around half of our coding should be level 3s.

it doesnt sound like that is what some people on this forum are doing.

ortho apparently does 51-60% level 3s.

noninvasive cardiology is 53-64% level 4s.


i dont have MGMA access.

Do you drive 1 MPH under the posted speed limit in the left lane next to a semi to ensure the 12 cars behind you don't exceed the speed limit?

If you do the work and document according to the expectations for a level 4, you should bill a level 4. If you bill a level a 3 while doing/documenting level 4 work, you are also committing fraud.

Your complex patient population certainly justifies greater than average number of level 4 visits.

Matching a benchmark is nonsense.
 
Do you drive 1 MPH under the posted speed limit in the left lane next to a semi to ensure the 12 cars behind you don't exceed the speed limit?

If you do the work and document according to the expectations for a level 4, you should bill a level 4. If you bill a level a 3 while doing/documenting level 4 work, you are also committing fraud.

Your complex patient population certainly justifies greater than average number of level 4 visits.

Matching a benchmark is nonsense.
Here’s a snippet of my latest feedback from coding.

Several were bumped from 3 to 4, none down coded. Clearly, I didn’t know about the 96127, which is 0.16 wRVUs if applicable.

IMG_2220.jpeg
 
Here’s a snippet of my latest feedback from coding.

Several were bumped from 3 to 4, none down coded. Clearly, I didn’t know about the 96127, which is 0.16 wRVUs if applicable.

View attachment 406773
You’re doing a lot of G2211. Are these mostly opioid patients or do use it one repeat injection patients
 
Top