Should doctors become certified coders?

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

dermacat

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
May 30, 2014
Messages
37
Reaction score
25
With the transition from ICD-9 to ICD-10, moving from 13000 to 68000 diagnostic codes with greater complexities, is it necessary for doctors to become certified coders? I am an incoming medical student and I don't have the field experience necessary to answer this question for myself. But I am curious, will becoming a certified coder benefit me as a physician or the practice that I am working for? Or is becoming certified for coding and billing entirely outside the scope of my career? I feel that it must prove some benefits in regards to workflow... What are your thoughts? Is this something I should invest more time in?

Members don't see this ad.
 
There are people who have specialized in coding as a career. They are way better at it than you ever will be. You have enough facts to saturate your brain as it is, without adding 68k more.

If you learn a handful of relevant codes, that will be enough to let you expedite the processing of 80% of your reimbursement related paperwork. The other 20%... leave that to the pros. Your time is likely to be worth 5-20 times as much as that of the coder, so delegate accordingly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I would like to point out that it is your and not your professional coder's ass on the line... the headlines will not read "coding expert Sally has been charged with Medicare fraud"... etc. Just a thought -- better learn your ****.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Members don't see this ad :)
I would like to point out that it is your and not your professional coder's ass on the line... the headlines will not read "coding expert Sally has been charged with Medicare fraud"... etc. Just a thought -- better learn your ****.

Sure... but you don't need to know it as an incoming medical student... Especially since anything learned now is likely to be out of date by the time it matters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Sure... but you don't need to know it as an incoming medical student... Especially since anything learned now is likely to be out of date by the time it matters.

Exactly. There are times when what you learned yesterday is outdated tomorrow. Ugh.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Thank you for the responses. I'm an MD/MBA student, and the MBA track has an emphasis on Health Organization Management. Lately in class there's been a lot of talk regarding the upcoming ICD-10 and how becoming certified shortly after its release will not only help with the overall efficiency of your practice, but will also be a major advantage when it comes time for finding employment/maintaining employment. I was wondering if that also applies to physicians or just the administrators...it sounded as if it was directed at both. While I can reason that coding experience or certification may, even indirectly, benefit me along my journey, I suppose just learning a handful of codes relevant to my field later in the future will also be plenty sufficient. At the same token, from a liability standpoint, I may rather reach for a more formal education in that domain... wouldn't want expert coder Sally pulling one over on me! :joyful: And it appears that often times coding mistakes are simply accidental, so taking the time to learn it, bringing in that additional checkpoint, sounds beneficial enough just to keep from unknowingly raising flags of fraud. I basically can reason both sides of the equation, but without the experience or ability to peek ahead into the future, I can't determine which side to lean towards or the extent of the affect it will have on me as a physician. I recognize its a bit early for me to concern myself with this, but I like to at least seek some answers in regards to how I can plan for my future, with everything else being so obscure. Thanks again!
 
Thank you for the responses. I'm an MD/MBA student, and the MBA track has an emphasis on Health Organization Management. Lately in class there's been a lot of talk regarding the upcoming ICD-10 and how becoming certified shortly after its release will not only help with the overall efficiency of your practice, but will also be a major advantage when it comes time for finding employment/maintaining employment. I was wondering if that also applies to physicians or just the administrators...it sounded as if it was directed at both. While I can reason that coding experience or certification may, even indirectly, benefit me along my journey, I suppose just learning a handful of codes relevant to my field later in the future will also be plenty sufficient. At the same token, from a liability standpoint, I may rather reach for a more formal education in that domain... wouldn't want expert coder Sally pulling one over on me! :joyful: And it appears that often times coding mistakes are simply accidental, so taking the time to learn it, bringing in that additional checkpoint, sounds beneficial enough just to keep from unknowingly raising flags of fraud. I basically can reason both sides of the equation, but without the experience or ability to peek ahead into the future, I can't determine which side to lean towards or the extent of the affect it will have on me as a physician. I recognize its a bit early for me to concern myself with this, but I like to at least seek some answers in regards to how I can plan for my future, with everything else being so obscure. Thanks again!

There is no way in hell that ICD-10 will benefit efficiency to anyone other than a data mining entity -- and insurers seeking to deny or otherwise risk stratify. As a provider, it can be nothing but a parasitic time suck.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
things like icd-10 are precisely why computers exist. don't waste your time becoming a "certified coder"
 
things like icd-10 are precisely why computers exist. don't waste your time becoming a "certified coder"


The problem is that that's not always true. When Medicare pays differently for coding heart failure (NOS) (everyone's favorite "CHF exacerbation" code) and "Acute on chronic systolic/diastolic heart failure," then it's important to write the diagnosis correctly. When "Long term insulin use" is a billable ICD10 code, suddenly it pays to know to list that as a separate diagnosis. That being said, depending on your practice, you learn the codes that you use 99% of the time and let your coder come back and question you on the rest.

Of course for the hospitalists, it's all about the E/M codes than the DRGs anyways.
 
From my experience with the transition from 9 to 10, I think the most important thing for future physicians to realize and remember is that ICD10 was implemented because we needed more detail. When you're a physician, keep in mind the need for detail as you write orders. It really does make a HUGE difference with insurance companies, I promise you. I hate having to tell a patient "Medicare may not cover this" because we didn't get a detailed enough diagnosis on an outpatient order.
 
Just look into becoming third-party free instead and you never have to code anything. I don't even remember office visit codes now. 99213/99214 or whatever. And if you type a 3 instead of a 4 you could be accused of fraud.

ICD-10 is playing right into the hands of those who would further want to turn physicians into another commodity like milk and garbage collection. The elite in medical establishment, which typically are less involved in clinical care will of course, along with faculty think it is a wonderful thing.

Finally, the notion of needing "more detail" will lead to a further fragmentation of care; a further superficial simplification of complex cases. If you work in mainstream medicine, you are increasingly entering an autocracy and you are nowhere near the top, not even with deciding everything.
 
Thank you for the responses. I'm an MD/MBA student, and the MBA track has an emphasis on Health Organization Management. Lately in class there's been a lot of talk regarding the upcoming ICD-10 and how becoming certified shortly after its release will not only help with the overall efficiency of your practice, but will also be a major advantage when it comes time for finding employment/maintaining employment. I was wondering if that also applies to physicians or just the administrators...it sounded as if it was directed at both. While I can reason that coding experience or certification may, even indirectly, benefit me along my journey, I suppose just learning a handful of codes relevant to my field later in the future will also be plenty sufficient. At the same token, from a liability standpoint, I may rather reach for a more formal education in that domain... wouldn't want expert coder Sally pulling one over on me! :joyful: And it appears that often times coding mistakes are simply accidental, so taking the time to learn it, bringing in that additional checkpoint, sounds beneficial enough just to keep from unknowingly raising flags of fraud. I basically can reason both sides of the equation, but without the experience or ability to peek ahead into the future, I can't determine which side to lean towards or the extent of the affect it will have on me as a physician. I recognize its a bit early for me to concern myself with this, but I like to at least seek some answers in regards to how I can plan for my future, with everything else being so obscure. Thanks again!



Given the above, you absolutely should become a certified coder, just not now. Concentrate on learning to become an excellent physician. Once you graduate from Med school, you can decide if a residency is worth it for you. If it is, concentrate on excelling in the first year, then that is the time to begin learning this stuff. With an MBA, you seem to have an eye toward leadership, you will earn significant street cred as well as a deeper understanding of the system and the folks who make it work if you get a coders certification.

If you decide to become purely clinical, certification is mandatory. The ROI on such and endeavor is so high as to be beyond calculating, you will be able to leverage the commodity you possess, clinical time, as well as the measuring agent, the EHR, to a much much greater degree. It has helped me amplify both to an astonishing degree.

Good luck
 
No need to become a certified coder. First off, you will never need to know or use all 68k codes. There will be a subset of those that are relevant to your chosen speciality. Second, a good EMR, like Epic, will walk you through the process of selecting the appropriate ICD-10 code. CPT codes are different - there I rely heavily on certified coders who have more time and experience than I do. I do not see this changing.
 
The best response to icd10 would be to drop medicare and any insurance requires icd10
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
My 2 cents: Don't waste time becoming a coder. Do spend time to know basics of top 10-20 codes relevant to your practice.
 
Top