1. Building an E/M Code
The Basics of Evaluation &
Management Services
Department of Revenue Integrity
2. Charting History
Medical records tell a story about a patient’s care
and treatment. Whether it’s a fifteen minute
consultation or a weeklong hospital stay, all of the
time a patient is seen by someone in healthcare, is
tracked.
Medical record documentation is required to record
pertinent facts, findings and observations about an
individual’s health history, including past and
present illnesses, examinations, tests, treatments
and outcomes.
It’s imperative that as coders, we read through the
documentation and accurately pick up certain
pieces so that we can determine a level of visit.
By laying brick upon brick, buildings are built. We
do the same with our E/M codes by adding together
elements from documentation to support a level of
visit.
3. E/M Factors to consider
Type of service (TOS)
Visit, consult, observation?
Place of service (POS)
Emergency room, office,
inpatient hospital,
outpatient hospital, etc.
Patient Status
New vs. Established
4. Patient status
A coder should be able to determine from the medical record
whether or not the patient is NEW or ESTABLISHED.
CPT defines a new patient as “one who HAS NOT received any
professional services from the physician or another physician of
the same specialty who belongs to the same group practice,
within the past three years.”
An established patient is “one has HAS received professional
services from the physician or another physician of the same
specialty who belongs to the same group practice, within the past
three years.”
You’ll also notice in CPT that new patients require 3/3 key
components, whereas established patients require 2/3. This
determination is based on work performed and prior knowledge of
the patient and their needs.
7. Places of service
There are many different places of
service for patients to be seen:
Offices, hospitals (inpatient and
outpatient), observation, emergency
departments, nursing facilities,
domicilaries, and patient’s homes.
By locating the place of service, it
determines a certain range of codes and
rules out a group that cannot be reported.
8. Components that make up E/M services
Key Components:
History
Examination
Medical Decision Making
Contributory Components:
Counseling
Coordination of Care
Nature of presenting
problem (illness)
Time
9. Key Components
History
Examination
Medical Decision Making
Office or other outpatient services
Hospital observation services
Hospital inpatient services
Consultations
Emergency Department services,
Nursing facility services,
Domiciliary care services
Home Care Services
10. Key Component: History
The history element is made up of four
types of history:
Chief Complaint (CC)
History of Present Illness (HPI)
Review of Systems (ROS)
Past, Family & Social History (PFSH)
11. HISTORY: Chief Complaint (CC)
Defined as “a concise statement
describing the symptom, problem,
condition, diagnosis, or other factor that is
the reason for the encounter, usually
stated in the patient’s own words”.
A chief complaint must be present in all
charts to count toward an E/M level of
service.
12. HISTORY: Chief Complaint (cont.)
Examples:
“Patient presents for follow-up of
fracture care…”
“38-year old female is complaining of
build-up of ear wax…”
“17-year old male was in high-speed MVA
and is complaining of headache, neck
pain and shoulder pain.”
13. HISTORY: History of Present Illness (HPI)
Defined as a “chronological description of
patient’s present condition from time of onset to
present”.
May not always include a timeline of events
May not be stated in the patient’s own words if
unable to speak (i.e. CVA, trauma, etc.)
Clues can be given by family or other medical
personnel present at scene if trauma
Includes eight description terms that may be met
when calculating the HPI
15. HISTORY: HPI
Location
WHERE on the body the
symptom is occurring
i.e. chest pain
i.e sore throat
i.e. knee swelling
Some questions physicians
will ask are:
Is the pain diffuse or
localized?
Unilateral or bilateral?
Fixed or migratory?
If documented, give one
point for location.
16. HISTORY: HPI
Severity
A rank of the
symptom/pain on a scale
from 1-10.
May also be described as
severe, slightly, “worst I’ve
ever had”, mild, moderate,
increasing, decreasing,
progressive, well.
If documented, give one
point for severity.
17. HISTORY: HPI
Duration
Describes how long the
symptom/pain has been
present or how long it
lasts when the patient has
it
i.e. 20 minutes
i.e. 3 years ago
i.e. since last Friday
i.e. approximately two
months ago
i.e. yesterday
If documented, give one
point for duration.
18. HISTORY: HPI
Associated Signs/Symptoms
Describes the
symptom/pain and other
things that happen when
this symptom/pain occurs.
i.e. chest pain leads to
shortness of breath
Headache leads to visual
disturbances
If documented, give one
point for associated
signs/symptoms.
19. HISTORY: HPI
Quality
Describes the
character or type of
the symptom/ pain
i.e. sharp
i.e. dull
i.e. burning
If documented, give
one point point for
quality.
20. HISTORY: HPI
Context
Describes HOW it
happened; situation
associated with the
pain/symptom
i.e. exercise, dairy
products, in an MVA,
running down the
steps, sitting in a
chair
If documented, give
one point for context.
21. HISTORY: HPI
Timing
Describes WHEN the
pain/symptom occurs
or establishes the
onset for each
symptom (why and
when) and a rough
chronology of the
event(s) surrounding
If documented, give
one point for timing.
22. HISTORY: HPI
Modifying Factors
Were medications
taken to counter the
effects of pain? Did
the patient eat or lay
down? What was
done in an attempt to
resolve the issue?
If documented, give
one point for
modifying factors.
23. HISTORY: HPI Types
There are two
types of HPI and
they factor into
the E/M level.
Notice once you
have four
elements of HPI,
you’re now in the
detailed range.
Be careful when
counting these.
Brief 1-3
elements
Extended 4+
elements
(’95)
OR 3
chronic
conditions
(’97)
24. Example of History: HPI
Patient complains of stabbing, intermittent
chest pain which began eight hours ago
while watching television. He rated the pain
as 8/10 in severity and is worse with exertion. It is
also associated with SOB and nausea.
25. Example Answer
Patient complains of stabbing, intermittent
chest pain which began eight hours ago
while watching television. He rated the pain
as 8/10 in severity and is worse with exertion. It
is also associated with SOB and nausea.
Timing
Quality
Location Duration
Context
Severity
Modifying
factor
Associated S/S
26. HISTORY: Review of Systems (ROS)
An inventory of body systems obtained
through a series of questions, seeking to
identify signs and/or symptoms that the
patient may be experiencing or may have
experienced.
There are fourteen body systems/areas
that are covered in this element.
28. HISTORY: ROS Types
There are three types
of ROS.
Problem focused is
not relevant in ROS
because to have 1
ROS element, you
already are at the
expanded problem
focused history.
Problem
pertinent
Focuses on
sole problem
Extended Inquires
about the
system
directly
related to the
problem (2-9
systems)
Complete Inquires
about all
systems
(10+)
29. Example of History: ROS
Patient admits to lower back pain, loss of
balance and dizziness. He denies nausea,
vomiting, fever or chills. Also he denies
abdominal pain, urinary frequency, and painful
urination. He further denies chest pain, SOB and
headaches. Does admit to fatigue and anxiety.
30. Example Answer
Patient admits to lower back pain, loss of
balance and dizziness. He denies nausea,
vomiting, fever or chills. Also he denies
abdominal pain, urinary frequency, and painful
urination. He further denies chest pain, SOB and
headaches. Does admit to fatigue and anxiety.
Musculoskeletal
Neuro
Gastro
Constitutional
Genitourinary
Cardio
Respiratory
Hemat Psych
31. Checklist: ROS
GEN c/o occ malaise and weight gain
EYES No blurred vision
CVS No CP, DOE, PND, orthopnea, syncope, palpitations
RESP No cough, wheezing, hemoptysis, SOB
GI No N/V/D/C, melena, heartburn, pain
GU No dysuria, urgency, hesitancy, nocturia, incontinence
SKIN No ulcers, itching, dryness, rash
MUSC No joint pain, gait disturbance, cramps
NEURO No confusion, memory loss, seizures, LOC, occ headache
OTHERS Remaining systems are negative
32. HISTORY: PFSH
PFSH is an abbreviation for past, family
and social history which make up the third
part of the history element.
These three types of history paint a
clearer picture for the physician to help
narrow down a specific injury, alert the
physician to a need for testing in a certain
area, or provide background for medical
decision making.
33. HISTORY: PFSH
Past history (patient’s past
experiences with
illnesses, operations,
injuries and treatments)
Family history (a review of
medical events in the
patient’s family, including
diseases which may be
hereditary or place a
patient at risk
Social history (age
appropriate review of past
and current activities)
Social
Family
Past
34. HISTORY: PFSH Types
There are two types
of PFSH.
Problem focused and
expanded problem
focused are not
relevant as they don’t
require any of the
PFSH types for a
certain level to be
met.
Pertinent At least 1
item from
any of the
three areas
(must be
directly
related to
HPI)
Complete 2-3 areas
35. Example of History: PFSH
HPI: Coronary artery disease.
PFSH: Patient returns to office for follow
up of CABG in 1992. Recent cardiac
catheterization demonstrates 50%
occlusion of vein graft to obtuse marginal
artery.
36. Example Answer
HPI: Coronary artery disease.
PFSH: Patient returns to office for follow
up of CABG in 1992. Recent cardiac
catheterization demonstrates 50%
occlusion of vein graft to obtuse marginal
artery.
DIRECT RELATION TO HPI
One
element
37. PFSH Requirements NEW Pts:
At least one specific
item from EACH of
the history areas
(past, family AND
social history) must
be documented for
the following
categories of E/M
services to obtain a
comprehensive
PFSH.
3/3 Office or other outpatient
svcs, new
Hospital observation
services
Hospital inpatient
services, initial
Comprehensive
NF assessments
Domiciliary care,
new pt
Home care, new pt
38. PFSH Requirements EST Pts:
At least one specific
item from TWO of the
three history areas
(past and family,
family and social, or
social and past) must
be documented for a
complete PFSH.
2/3 Office or other
outpatient services,
established
Emergency
Department
Domiciliary care, est.
Subsequent NF care
Home care, est.
39. History Recap
Documentation requirements
Level of
Hx
Problem
Focused
Expanded
Problem
Focused
Detailed Comprehensive
HPI 1-3 1-3 4+ 4+
ROS 0 1 2-9 10
PFSH 0 0 1 2/3
40. Important E/M rules to remember:
Levels do not crosswalk.
Some codes are based on time.
The chief complaint, ROS and PFSH may
be listed as separate elements of history,
or they may be included in the description
of the HPI. Pay attention to only pull what
is necessary as long as the
documentation is provided.
41. Important E/M rules (cont.)
An ROS and/or a PFSH obtained during
an earlier encounter doesn’t need to be
re-recorded if there is evidence that a
physician reviewed and updated the
previous information.
This does NOT mean that
copying/pasting is allowed by any
physician.
42. Important E/M rules (cont.)
If the physician is unable to obtain history,
from the patient or other source, the
reason why should be listed.
43. Key Component: Examination
An examination is a thorough evaluation
from head to toe of a patient, who is
presenting with an illness/injury.
There are two kinds of acceptable
examinations approved by CMS. They
are the 1995 guidelines and the 1997
guidelines. They are made up of body
areas and organ systems.
45. Examination
ORGAN SYSTEMS
Constitutional (e.g., vital signs,
general appearance)
Eyes
Ears, nose, mouth, throat
Cardiovascular
Respiratory
Gastrointestinal
Genitourinary
Musculoskeletal
Skin
Neurologic
Psychiatric
Hematologic/Lymphatic/
Immunologic
46. 1995 Guidelines:
The levels of E/M services are based on four types of
examination that are defined as follows:
https://www.cms.gov/MLNProducts/Downloads/1995dg.pdf
Problem focused Limited exam- affected body area or
organ system
Expanded problem
focused
Limited exam- affected body area or organ
system & other symptomatic or related
organ system(s).
Detailed Extended exam- affected body area(s) and other
symptomatic or related organ system(s).
Comprehensive Multi-system exam or complete exam of a single
organ system
47. 1997 Guidelines:
https://www.cms.gov/MLNProducts/Downloads/MASTER1.pdf
• Problem Focused Examination-should include performance and documentation of one to five
elements identified by a bullet (•) in one or more organ system(s) or body area(s).
• Expanded Problem Focused Examination-should include performance and documentation of
at least six elements identified by a bullet (•) in one or more organ system(s) or body
area(s).
• Detailed Examination--should include at least six organ systems or body areas. For each
system/area selected, performance and documentation of at least two elements identified
by a bullet (•) is expected. Alternatively, a
detailed examination may include performance and documentation of at least twelve
elements identified by a bullet (•) in two or more organ systems or body areas.
• Comprehensive Examination--should include at least nine organ systems orbody areas. For
each system/area selected, all elements of the examination identified by a bullet (•) should
be performed, unless specific directions limit the content of the examination. For each
area/system, documentation of at least two elements identified by a bullet is expected.
48. Differences in Exams:
Problem focused
one body area or organ system
Problem focused
1-5 bulleted elements
Expanded problem-focused
2+ body areas and/or organ systems
Expanded problem focused
6-11 bulleted elements
Detailed
5+ body areas and/or organ systems
Detailed
12-17 bulleted elements for 2+
systems
Comprehensive
8+ body areas and/or organ systems
Comprehensive
18+ bulleted elements for 9+ systems
1995 guidelines 1997 guidelines
49. Key Component: MDM
The last piece that helps determine an E/M is the
Medical Decision Making. This piece is a little bit
more complex, but relevant to determining a
level.
Medical Decision Making Types
Straight
forward
Low Moderate High
50. Complexity of MDM
Two of the three elements must be met or exceeded to
qualify for a given type of MDM, or drop to the lowest.
Number of
diagnoses or
management
options
Amount and/or
complexity of
data to be
reviewed
Risk of
complications
and/or morbidity
or mortality
Type of decision
making
Minimal Minimal or
none
Minimal Straightforward
Limited Limited Low Low
Multiple Moderate Moderate Moderate
Extensive Extensive High High
51. Number of Dx or Mgmt Options
The number of possible diagnoses and/or
the number of management options that
must be considered is based on the
number and types of problems addressed
during the encounter, the complexity of
establishing a diagnosis and the
management decisions made by the
physician.
52. Number of Dx or Mgmt Options
Generally, decision-making with respect to a
diagnosed problem is easier than that for an
identified but undiagnosed problem.
The number and type of diagnostic tests
employed may be an indicator of the number of
possible diagnoses.
Problems which are improving or resolving are
less complex than those which are worsening or
failing to change as expected.
The need to seek advice from others is another
indicator of the complexity.
53. Amt and/or complexity of data
The amount and complexity of data to be
reviewed is based on the types of
diagnostic testing ordered or reviewed. A
decision to obtain and review old medical
records and/or obtain history from
sources other than the patient increases
the amount and complexity.
54. Amt and/or complexity of data
Discussion of contradictory or unexpected
test results with the physician who
performed or interpreted the test is an
indication of the complexity of data being
reviewed. On occasion, the physician
who ordered a test may personally review
the image, tracing or specimen to
supplement information from the
physician who prepared the test report or
interpretation.
55. Risk of Significant Complications, Morbidity and/or Mortality
These are based on the risks associated with the
presenting problem(s), the diagnostic
procedure(s), and the possible management
options.
The table of risk breaks down different
categories.
Levels of risk are determined by the risk of the:
Presenting problem(s)
Diagnostic procedure(s) ordered
Management options selected
56. How do I build an E/M level?
There are so many complexities and facets I
have to address when extracting data from a
chart. Where do I even begin!?
57. Calculating an E/M Level
When calculating the
history portion, all
three elements in a
row must be met
(HPI, ROS and
PFSH). You must
have 3/3 for a given
category in the table,
or you must drop to
the lowest level.
Level
1-3
HPI
0 ROS 0
PFSH
PF
1-3
HPI
1 ROS 0
PFSH
SPF
4+ HPI 2-9
ROS
1
PFSH
D
4+ HPI 10+
ROS
2/3
PFSH
C
58. Calculating an E/M Level
When
calculating
the exam
portion,
choose the
exam that
matches
how many
levels were
met.
LEVEL
1 Area/System PF
2-7 Systems EPF
2-7 Systems or 3+ each
system
D
8+ Systems C
59. Calculating an E/M Level
Number of
diagnoses or
management
options
Amount
and/or
complexity of
data to be
reviewed
Risk of
complications
and/or
morbidity or
mortality
Type of decision
making
Minimal Minimal or
none
Minimal Straightforward
Limited Limited Low Low
Multiple Moderate Moderate Moderate
Extensive Extensive High High
60. Number of Dx or Mgmt Options
Self-limited or minor (stable, improved, or worsened)
Max 2 points
1 point
Established problem (to examining MD); stable or improved 1 point
Established problem (to examining MD); worsening 2 points
New problem (to examining MD); no additional workup
planned
Max 3 points
3 points
New problem (to examining MD); additional workup (eg,
admit/transfer)
4 points
61. Amt and/or Complexity of Data Reviewed
Lab ordered and/or reviewed 1 point
X-ray ordered and/or reviewed 1 point
Medicine section (90701-99199) ordered and/or reviewed 1 point
Discussion of test results w/ performing physician 1 point
Decision to obtain old records and/or obtain hx from someone
other than the pt
1 point
Review and summary of old records and/or obtaining history
from someone other than patient and/or discussion with another
health provider
2 points
Independent visualization of image, tracing or specimen (not
simply review of report)
2 points
62. Table of Risk
See attached table of risk (separate)
Choose the highest risk out of each of the
categories.
Because your MDM needs 2/3 elements to be
satisfied, you can choose the highest risk and be
sure to tally the points so that your level can be
justified. However, due to the other two grids,
the level may be lowered.
64. E/M Coding Example
HISTORY -- DETAILED
HPI:
Location (bronchial asthma)
Timing (one day per week)
Context (exercize induced)
Modifying factors (treated with Albuterol Inhaler)
ROS:
Respiratory (snoring & sleep apnea)
Psych (depression)
GI (GERD symptoms)
PFSH:
Past (history of aspirin intolerance)
Social (no environmental changes)
EXAM – EXP. PROB. FOCUSED
Constitutional (general condition/VS)
Eyes (conjunctivae)
ENT (TM/nasal mucosa)
Respiratory (lungs)
Cardio (CVS)
MDM -- MODERATE
4 Diagnoses
Prescription Drug Mgmt
BILLED AS: 99213
SUPPORTS: 99214
REQUIRED FOR NEXT LEVEL:
“All other systems reviewed & negative”
3 other body systems in Exam
65. HISTORY – EXP. PROB. FOCUSED
HPI:
Location (arms, legs & neck)
Associated signs & symptoms (not puritic nor
painful)
ROS:
Constitutional (no fevers)
All/Immuno (allergies reviewed and updated)
PFSH:
Past (immunization history, unremarkable)
EXAM – EXP. PROB. FOCUSED
Constitutional (VS)
Eyes (conjunctivae)
ENT (TM/no erythema)
Respiratory (without rhonchi, wheezes)
Cardio (RRR, no murmurs)
GI (soft, NT/ND)
Skin (large vesicular-bullous lesions)
MDM -- LOW
1 new problem – no additional work-up
Obtaining history from someone other than pt
OTC drugs
BILLED AS: 99213
SUPPORTS: 99213
REQUIRED FOR NEXT LEVEL:
2 elements HPI
8 ROS or “all others reviewed…”
1 additional body system in exam
66. Clinical example:
1.
An established patient is seen in the clinic for
allergic rhinitis. A problem focused history, EPF
exam and a low level of MDM were performed.
What E/M code would be reported for the visit?
a. 99212
b. 99213
c. 99214
d. 99215
68. Clinical example:
2.
A patient is admitted to the hospital for a lung
transplant. The admitting physician performs a
comprehensive history, a comprehensive exam,
and a high level of MDM. What CPT code
should be reported?
a. 99221
b. 99222
c. 99223
d. 99234
70. Clinical example:
3.
A new patient is seen in the pediatric office for ear pain. The
patient has had pain for four days and it keeps her awake
at night. She has had a slight fever (99 degrees). She
has not been swimming or actively in water for the past
couple of months. She denies any cough, nasal
congestion, or stuffiness, or loss of weight. The provider
does a limited exam on the ears, nose, throat and neck.
The patient is determined to have otitis media. Amoxicillin
is prescribed. What E/M code would be reported for this
visit?
a. 99201
b. 99202
c. 99203
d. 99204
71. Clinical example answer:
3.
b. 99202
For a new patient visit, all three key
components must be met. This visit has
an EPF HPI, EPF exam and moderate
MDM for prescription drug management.
72. Clinical example:
4.
A 45-year old patient is seeing the neurologist, Dr. Williams,
at the request of his family physician to evaluate
complaints of weakness, numbness, and pain in his left
hand and arm. The pain started last year after rocks fell
on him while mining. He still has significant, sharp,
burning wrist pain and reports the problems are continuing
to get worse. He is limited in his job as a machinist for a
mining company due to the pain and numbness. He has
no swelling in his hand, no neck pain, or radiating pain.
His past medical history is negative for significant diseases.
He has had carpal tunnel surgery. He has a family history
of hypertension, heart disease, and stroke. He is married
with children and smokes one pack of cigarettes/day.
73. Clinical example (cont.)
A detailed exam is performed of the mental status, cranial nerves,
motor nerves, DTRs, sensory nerves, and head and neck.
After performing an EMG and NCS, Dr. Williams determined the
patient has left ulnar neuropathy, at the cubital tunnel region, as
well as ongoing carpal tunnel syndrome. Repeat carpal tunnel
surgery is recommended, along with a possible cubital tunnel
surgical procedure. If the patient does not have surgery, he risks
permanent nerve damage. A report is sent back to the physician
requesting the consult. What E/M consultation code would be
reported for this visit?
a. 99242
b. 99243
c. 99244
d. 99245
74. Clinical example answer:
4.
b. 99243
A consultation requires all three key
components be met to support the level of
visit.
There is a detailed history, detailed exam
and a moderate MDM for the elective
major surgery.
76. Contributory Component: Counseling
May be included during the visit of a patient and
reflect conversations with the patient and/or
family regarding risk reduction, treatment
options, benefits and risks associated with
differing treatment options and other education
given to the patient/family.
Often occurs when there is a complicated
illness/injury or when there is a newly diagnosed
patient with an acute or chronic illness posing a
threat to life.
77. Counseling example:
“I had an extremely extensive 60+ minute
examination and series of discussions with
the patient and her family members. Over
half of the time was spent on counseling
them. At great length, with the patient
and her daughter, and later with her son-
in-law who arrived secondarily, and later
again with her husband, who arrived at the
end of my visit, I discussed how diabetic
injury, especially with neuropathy, she
would be at risk, over time, of valvular
dysfunction in the leg veins. I discussed
the anatomy and physiology of orthostatic
hypotension, and how this can be very
pronounced, especially in long-term
diabetics…”
78. Contributory component: Coordination of care
Usually with other providers or agencies
Without a patient encounter on that day
Reported with case management codes
Example:
Physician spends 20 minutes assessing a patient with
recurrent ear infections.
Spends additional 20 minutes counseling parents with
strategies to decrease the incidence of ear infections,
treatment options and allaying parent anxiety.
99213 E/M selected on the basis of time criteria (more than
50% of face-to-face encounter dominated by counseling).
79. Contributory component: Nature of
presenting problem(s)
Reason for visit: sign, symptom, illness,
or disease being treated
Minimal- may not require presence of
physician, services are provided under
physician’s supervision.
Examples: removal of sutures, supervised
drug screen, patient needs release for
school/work.
80. Contributory component: Nature (cont.)
Self-limited or minor-
Does not permanently alter health status
and with management and compliance
has an outcome of “good”.
Typically heal well on their own without
physician supervision.
Examples: poison ivy, poison oak
exposure, sore throat, resolved tonsillitis
81. Contributory Component: Nature (cont.)
Low-
Risk of morbidity/mortality without
treatment is low and full recovery with no
functional impairment is expected.
Examples: management of a
hypertensive patient on medication,
established patient for follow up of
osteoporosis, painful bunion.
82. Contributory Component: Nature (cont.)
Moderate-
Risk of morbidity/mortality without
treatment is moderate, uncertain
prognosis or increased probability of
prolonged functional impairment.
Examples: diabetic w/ complications, s/p
MI patient who is not doing well on
medication, patient with new onset of
RLQ abdominal pain
83. Contributory Component: Nature (cont.)
High-
Risk of morbidity/mortality without
treatment is highly probable; uncertain
prognosis or high probability of severe
prolonged functional impairment.
Examples: s/p transplant patient
developing new symptoms or cancer
patient with signs of paralysis
84. Contributory Component: Time
“When counseling and/or coordination of care
dominates (more than 50%) the physician/patient
and/or family encounter…” (CPT guidelines)
May include face-to-face time in the office or
other outpatient setting, or floor/unit time in the
hospital or nursing facility, and includes time
spent with parties who have assumed
responsibility for the care of the patient or
decision making whether or not they are family
members.
85. Contributory Component: Time (cont.)
Time the physician spends taking the
patient’s history or performing an
examination does not count as counseling
time.
He/She must look at the entire patient
encounter and determine if they spent the
majority of time in counseling and/or
coordination of care or if they should bill
using an E/M.
86. Contributory Component: Time (cont.)
Counseling and coordination of care could include
discussion with the patient (or his or her family) about one
or more of the following, according to CPT guidelines:
Diagnostic results
Impressions and/or recommended diagnostic studies
Prognosis
Risks and benefits of treatment options
Instructions for treatment and/or follow-up
Importance of compliance with chosen treatment options
Risk-factor reduction
Patient/family education
87. References:
E/M University, http://emuniversity.com
Current Procedural Terminology (2011). (2011). Chicago : American
Medical Association
Buck, C. (2010) Step-by-Step Medical Coding. Retrieved May 28, 2011.
www.educode.com/vaees (private access)
2011 Medical Coding Training (2011). Salt Lake City: American Medical
Association
Department of Health and Human Services. Evaluation and Management
Services Guide. , 2010. Web.
28 Jun 2011.
<https://www.cms.gov/MLNProducts/downloads/eval_mgmt_serv_guide-
ICN006764.pdf>.
Pierce, B. (2008) Advanced Coding Education Guide for Evaluation and
Management Auditing.
Rockville: DecisionHealth.
88. THANK YOU!
I appreciate your time in joining us today to
refresh your understanding of the E/M process.
So many of you have been doing this for years
and I understand and appreciate the talent you
have in determining levels.
Let’s continue to stay on task and use the proper
rules for coding these visits, so that we can
maintain accuracy and compliance within the
health care system.
-Grace Bower, CPC
Outpatient Coding/Billing Liaison
Welcome to the basics of evaluation and management services.
I am Grace Bower, CPC, Outpatient Coding Billing Liaison for the MetroHealth Medical Center. I have eleven years of time invested, and an extensive background, in medical billing and coding. I got started in medical billing in the year 2000 and my first job was in a small medical billing company in Broadview Heights where I learned to post charges and payments to patient accounts. I gradually learned other facets of the billing industry, including reconciling EOBs, writing appeal letters, and calling on outstanding claims. Four years into the business, I was selected at a particular billing company to enter their coding program, which introduced me to professional coding- which I love- and I’ve been maintaining my CPC credential for the last seven years.
I am going to spend a great deal of time today, breaking down the pieces that build our E/M services. Today we’re going to cover the history and review of systems portion. My hope is that these terms and phrases will make more sense to you and when you leave, you will be confident in your CPT Evaluation and Management code choice. Let’s begin.
With that being said, we’re going to go through each piece (or brick) of documentation so that we can build confidence in ourselves to determine E/M levels appropriately and accurately. We want each chart to be a clear cut picture of what happened with the patient and what was done to help them. However, we don’t live in a perfect world, and charts aren’t always as complete as we’d like. Without going on a rant, I just want our focus today to be on the pieces we CAN use to code properly. Audits are being performed by RAC auditors, CMS and other entities and we need to be on top of our game to be sure we’re representing our medical professionals with correct coding ethics.
Differentiating between an office visit and a consult can save you a lot of time in locating the proper code. This is why the type of service is important to help narrow down the range. You don’t want to assign 99221 for a low level established office visit, which would accurately be coded as 99213. Place of service will help you determine which range of codes to be in when selecting a code. And knowing the status of the patient (new/estab) will help you even further define the area in which you should be. These are all important factors to consider.
Distinguishing between whether or not the patient is new/established will help you determine the proper E/M code. An important, but often under discussed rule to remember (which is in the E/M guidelines of CPT) is that if a physician is on call and is covering for another physician, the patient’s encounter will be classified as it would have been by the physician who is not available. I’m sure our first instinct is to code as new because they’ve never seen the patient before, but CPT directs us to do otherwise.
An example I can give you from my current work practices, is when I am working the consult queue. We have to flip consult codes to new/established CPT codes because Medicare no longer accepts consult CPTs. Because of this, I have to open the patient account and sort all of their visits here at Metro to determine if they are new or established. If they’ve been seen by someone in the same specialty within the three year mark, I give them an established patient office visit code. Otherwise they are considered new and based on their place of service, I then assign a CPT based on the elements the physician met with documentation.
This is a grid you’re probably familiar with, that breaks down new patient codes. We’ll be using this table/grid today.
This is the grid used for established outpatient visits.
You wouldn’t code for an office visit in the emergency room. And the reason is obvious.
The definitions for the levels of most E/M services recognize seven components. These can be found on page 5 of your 2011 CPT codebooks. There are three key components and four contributory components. Most often, the E/M codes are selected based on the documentation of the key components. To substantiate certain levels of codes, information regarding at least two of the three components (sometimes all three) must be documented in the patient’s medical record.
Time is the determining factor for certain E/M codes when counseling and/or coordination of care takes up more than 50 percent of the total visit (face-to-face time in the office or other outpatient setting or floor/unit time in the hospital or nursing facility). It is also the controlling factor in certain E/M codes (i.e. CCT and discharge day management). We will discuss this more in detail toward the later part of this presentation. Just like building blocks, each element and component builds the E/M level.
I’ll begin by breaking down the key components and how to build an E/M code. Then we’ll establish the criteria to determine the contributory components that don’t need to build an E/M.
The key components in selecting the level of E/M services are history, examination and medical decision making. These three components appear in the descriptors for office or other outpatient services, hospital observation services, hospital inpatient services, consultations, emergency department services, nursing facility services, domiciliary services and home services.
Let’s begin by breaking down the history element.
The chief complaint is separate and is not typically grouped into the history portion, but because it establishes the reason for the visit, I’ve incorporated it into the history elements. The history of present illness, the review of systems, and the PFSH make up the history element. We’ll go into further detail on the next slide.
The chief complaint must be present in all charts regarding a patient’s presentation to the place of service. On reports or verbally given, a patient will state the reason for the visit and this is called the chief complaint. It is the building block for the reason to be in the presence of medical personnel.
Some examples are listed here and they are bolded to help you determine the chief complaint in each situation. When you see one in the chart, you can count it and move onto the HPI to determine your history level.
We’ve all seen HPI statements before. They typically describe the situation for the patient. In the case where a patient is unable to speak to explain their need for care, the history is incorporated from family members, friends, medical staff and recorded in the record with a caveat (“patient unable to speak due to symptoms of CVA, MVA or other trauma”).
On this slide I’ll list the eight descriptors that can be met for the HPI and then I’ll break them down individually. When counting elements for history, in order to get a comprehensive history level, FOUR of these must be met. In order to count the descriptor, they must be documented in the medical record.
Location is described as WHERE on the body/in the body is the patient experiencing symptoms. To further get a better understanding, physicians will ask questions to narrow down the site and figure out the plan of treatment. Some other examples are: lesion on neck, internal bleeding, epistaxis due to trauma, tingling all over, deep burning sensation. If the patient describes where the pain is located, you may give the physician a point for location.
You may have recently been in the hospital or visited a loved one and seen a sheet of paper hanging on the wall with smiley faces on them. There are usually ten faces on the page going from left to right and at number 1, the face is extremely happy, and by the time you get to the number 10 face, the smiley face has become a frown and usually looks painful. These are indicative of the severity of the pain level. Nurses and medical personnel will use these to ask the patient where their level of pain is, and then record it in the medical record. Some other descriptions may be: exquisite, heavy, weak appetite, constant headache, minimal discomfort, crushing pain, resolved, no pain, blistering burn, gaping wound. If the patient ranks their pain on a scale of 1-10 or explains the severity, you may given the physician a point for severity.
Duration and timing are very similar, but it is typically the length of time of the symptom. Some other common examples are: comes and goes, in the morning, while driving, since married, four hours after sex. If the length of time is documented in the record, you may give the physician a point for duration.
In order to rule out certain conditions, the physician may ask questions that can lead to other conditions, or help him/her better understand what is going on. They may ask more questions about additional sensations or feelings. If the physician documents additional symptoms, you may give them a point for associated signs/symptoms.
Quality is defined as the character or type. It is descriptive, like an adjective, and identifies the symptom or symptoms. Some other examples are: persistent pain, raised lesion, oozing blister, deep cut, smelly ulcer, throbbing headache, low grade fever, total numbness. If the physician documents the description of the problem, give them one point.
Context is HOW something happened and how the patient is experiencing the symptom/pain. It answers the question of what the patient was doing at the time the symptom began. It also provides a great background in order to apply E-codes for certain claims such as worker’s compensation claims, and to further describe the picture of what is going on with the patient. If the physician documents how and where the accident occurred or how the patient ended up in their current state, give them a point for context.
If the patient states in the medical record that the pain started at a certain time or is still continuing, this is known as timing. Some other examples are: everyday, after meals, in the winter, while thinking of work, two hours after headache began. If the physician includes when the symptom is occurring, give one point for timing.
What has the patient done in the meantime before coming to the ER? Have they taken any medication? Was there anything done before they arrived that helped or hindered their condition? Modifying factors are what the patient has attempted to do themselves that has worked or hasn’t worked and may need to be incorporated into the medical decision making, as a risk if something was done improperly. Some examples may be: elevating the leg helped, or increased the fiber in diet, closed doors and shut off lights to help the migraine, avoided spicy foods, taken ibuprofen or used an epi-pen. If the physician documented something the patient did in an attempt to help their symptoms/condition, give the physician a point.
If you look at your table card, you can see how 1-3 elements warrants a problem focused or expanded problem focused history. If you have more than 4 elements, then based on the rest of the history, your level will either become detailed or comprehensive. Be careful not to “round up” so the physician can get a higher level. If it’s not documented, it’s not done.
Here is an example of HPI and includes several descriptors that can be counted for the history portion of the E/M service. Let’s see if we can identify up to eight descriptors of history to obtain a comprehensive level. Read through the following example and highlight the ones you would extract to count for the billable physician. Assume the chief complaint was listed above this paragraph and already applied in the physician’s favor. On the next slide, we’ll go over the answer.
The following answer concludes that there are at least four elements of history in the HPI. I’ve bolded the appropriate terms that we can count and we can label them as a group. In total, we have all eight descriptors (in a perfect world, this would be wonderful!). This is an example of a comprehensive HPI.
Now we will move onto the review of systems. Sometimes, for coders, this element can be confused with the physical exam. The main thing to remember is that the review of systems is considered a history element, meaning past. Anything found today would fall under the physical exam, and be seen by the physician himself/herself.
The patient will disclose things that the physician needs to know regarding other symptoms they have or may have experienced. These fall under the ROS. The physician will learn things about the patient through questioning, not personally viewing (as in the physical exam element). An example would be: Patient states she has SOB today, but had a migraine two days ago. In the ROS, the neurology element should be checked, indicating a migraine was stated.
These are the fourteen categories of the review of systems. The physician will mark a response in one or more categories based on the body system or area, and we can count them individually for his/her credit. One thing to note is the all-inclusive statement. I was taught that if the physician marks one element and then states, “All other systems reviewed and are negative”, they can get a comprehensive ROS, without having to mark each and every category.
Also, sometimes the ROS will be in a checklist form, or in paragraph form and the coder will have to select out each individual element to count.
Depending on how many systems the physician reviews, they will eventually fall under one of these three types. They can be found on your table card under history. If you have one element, you are at expanded problem focused. If you have 2-9 elements reviewed, you are at a detailed ROS and anything over 9 is considered comprehensive. This factors into the history portion. All three parts: HPI, ROS and PFSH make up the history.
This is an example of ROS in paragraph form. Mark the ones you would count and we’ll review the answer on the next slide.
There are nine elements of ROS found in this note. Review the answers to see if you got the same. On the next slide, we’ll view the checklist version to see how that looks.
In this format, you can see the systems and there is a notation next to each one. As long as they are relevant to the system they purport to be a part of, you can count them. Often times, in this format, you may see something like EYES: no blurred vision, eyelid skin sensitive to touch. That’s actually two elements, even though skin was documented in the eyes category. Go ahead and count two.
This concludes the ROS portion.
PFSH is an abbreviation to describe three types of history which are relative to the physicians’ thought process. Sometimes labs or ancillary tests will be performed as a result to determine a baseline in someone who has a family history of diabetes or stroke or another chronic condition. It’s not always necessary to have a PFSH documented as you can see from the problem focused and expanded problem focused histories. Once you have one of these, you’re up to a detailed history (provided you’ve met other history criteria in the same grid).
These three types of history make up the PFSH.
If you have one type of PFSH, you are at a pertinent level, and if you have 2-3, you have a complete PFSH. I’d also like to reiterate, per CMS guidelines, that to reach pertinent status, it is a review of the history areas directly related to the problem(s) identified in the HPI. If it’s not, you can’t count it. This may be an annoying technicality, but it is the way CMS determines proper criteria are met. This tidbit was found in the December 2010 release of CMS E/M guidelines.
This is an example of the HPI and the PFSH that the physician documented. Was anything in the note beneficial to the HPI? PAUSE Yes, the CABG and artery occlusion.
This example only has one element that directly relates to the HPI, so you can give credit for this one. If the physician also documented that the patient was a chronic pack a day smoker, would you then be able to give credit for the social history as well? PAUSE for response. Yes.
YES…now you have 2/3 and depending on whether or not your patient is new/established, you’ve now approached a higher level of documentation.
These services are for new patients. These require 3/3 PFSH elements to count for a comprehensive level, otherwise the history portion will lower the level. Again, I’ll describe this in greater detail in a later portion of the presentation.
The following list is all established patient services. These would only require 2/3 PFSH elements to count toward a particular level. We’ll determine this as a group when we begin to calculate the level.
This is the history table to determine which level of history you have. Remember you need 3/3 elements to count for a specific category. On the screen, I’ve highlighted a Comprehensive HPI, Comprehensive ROS and Detailed PFSH, which means the history is now detailed, because I failed to meet all three in the Comprehensive category.
Some helpful tips to remember are that E/M levels do not crosswalk. A level 3 office visit doesn’t have the same criteria as a level 3 hospital admission. (Show grid card.) Also, some codes for services; discharge services, critical care and prolonged services are based on time instead of calculating an E/M. And remember that your chief complaint may not always be separately identifiable, it may be included in the HPI and you can pull it out to count for the CC, then add up your HPI, ROS and PFSH elements.
Previous ROS and/or PFSH information is allowed in the note by another physician, however there must be a note indicating the physician obtained it from a previous note, reviewed it and is using it as his/her own. This doesn’t mean the physicians are allowed to copy/paste from each others’ notes, or even their own previous notes. It means they will get credit for reviewing the previous documentation IF THEY NOTE that THAT is what they did. They may not just skip over it for timely reasons, or copy/paste due to laziness. We know this is an ongoing issue and are monitoring for certain situations. Now, can anyone tell me why you wouldn’t be able to re-use an HPI or an exam? Why only the ROS and PFSH for this rule?
Documentation can come from other sources, however the physician must document the original source so that we know he/she viewed them. We’re billing out THEIR services, not the nurses/staff. Also, if history is unobtainable, the reason as to WHY should be documented.
The second key component is the examination. Metro follows CMS’s rule that we can use either the ’95 guidelines for the examination, unless you are coding for a specialty exam where you may get more points for specific body areas/ organ systems. In that case, you would use the ’97 guidelines. We’ll take a look at both briefly.
There are eight body areas. These are commonly recognized.
There are fourteen organ systems that are recognized and can be counted toward an exam.
These are the four types of exam that can be documented.
I’ve attached the direct link for the 1997 documentation guidelines that I won’t be able to specifically cover today, but it goes into greater detail. You would most likely use these guidelines when you’re working on a specialty audit or chart that could obtain more points for a physician than a multi-system exam. To qualify for a given multi-system exam, the following content and documentation requirements should be met. You can see the attachments I’ve given you that show you the breakdown of all of the single organ system examinations that will give you credit, even if the exam is focused on one area.
See the differences between the two coding guidelines. The ’95 guidelines use a different counting system than the more complex ’97 guidelines.
On the next slide, we’ll break down the three elements of number of diagnoses of management options, amount and/or complexity of data to be reviewed, risk of significant complications, morbidity and/or mortality.
The first three columns are the three pieces that make up the MDM. We’ll get into the differences in these types of history on the next few slides.
The first piece of the medical decision making component is this:
These are all things to remember when assessing a chart.
The second piece of MDM is as follows:
The fact that a physician is discussing results is a part of the medical decision making process. He/She may also review images they’ve ordered and these can be given credit.
The following table may be used to help determine whether the risk of significant complications, morbidity and/or mortality is minimal, low, moderate or high. Because it is not easily quantifiable, the table includes common clinical examples rather than absolute measures of risk. The assessment of risk of the presenting problem(s) is based on the risk related to the disease process anticipated between the present encounter and the next one. The assessment of risk of selecting diagnostic procedure and management options is based on the risk during and immediately following any procedures or treatment.
Everything I’ve given you so far are your building blocks. They are the bricks you will use to support your level and just like the quality and resilience of brick material, the pieces you use to build your levels will get stronger and stronger as you build the level that matches the documentation.
See the grid to the right. It shows you a problem focused, expanded problem focused, detailed and comprehensive history. In each category, since you need 3/3 to meet a particular type of history, you must walk down the grid to be sure you have three in each category, otherwise you drop to the lowest level of history. The reason being is lack of documentation will lower your service, and this is how you begin to calculate it.
Depending on how many systems were reviewed, just crosswalk through the row to the level; whether it’s problem focused, expanded problem focused, detailed or comprehensive.
Beginning to calculate the MDM portion takes some more time to address, but with practice and time, you will get better at determining levels. The MDM has a few pieces to it, and you must remember that you need 2/3 MDM elements to hold a level or drop to the lowest. Regarding the table of risk, take the highest risk!
This grid is for the first piece of MDM. You will determine how many points to give your physician based on whether or not the patient’s diagnosis/diagnoses and management options meet the criteria listed above. If it’s a new problem with no workup, it’s 3 points. If it’s one self-limited problem (i.e. sinusitis) and has worsened, but they’re receiving Keflex on their way out the door, you can give one point.
This grid is the second piece of MDM. You will need to pay close attention to documentation to be sure to pick up when a physician orders and reviews a lab, or talks about test results with another doctor, etc. These events are all part of the complexity of data review and need to be accounted for.
Note if the physician orders a labe and reviews it, it counts for one point, not two.
Same with Radiology and the Medicine section of CPT. If they are ordered and reviewed, or ordered or reviewed, it counts as one point regardless.
Review the Table of Risk that you have as a handout and determine which risk factor from your diagnosis or list of diagnoses is the highest. As your MDM isn’t solely based on the risk, it’s okay to choose the highest because it “ups” the level, but keep in mind, due to the other two grids of number of management options and data review complexity, the MDM may be lowered.
We’ll work through a few examples to drive the point home. I want you all to be comfortable with reading, extracting, applying the rules and answering questions in your mind before assigning a level and appropriate diagnoses.
In this note, this is a follow-up for bronchial asthma. Thankfully the physician noted what the follow-up was for. This is your chief complaint. Then he/she rolls into some history. You can see the thought process of the coder down the side column which explains what was extracted out, to meet elements and build the code.
Again the coding rationale is completed down the side. This history is provided by the grandfather. In this instance, if documentation establishes that the provider cannot obtain a history from the patient or other source, the provider is not penalized, nor are the overall medical necessity level and provider work discounted automatically. The AAPC training manual states that “additional history supplied by a family member or caregiver and documented by the provider can be credited toward the overall E/M service’s MDM component.”
Continue to next slide…
There are four contributory components to E/M service leveling. They are counseling, coordination of care, the nature of presenting problems and time. The first two factors are important in E/M, but they are not required for each visit. I’ll break these down individually for you.
Sometimes there are complex situations that don’t fall into the key components we’ve discussed. In the event that someone has a life-threatening illness or injury, the physician may need to take the time to speak with the family regarding choices and decisions that must be made for life, and these take time in counseling. They may even take place with the patient themselves. But this is accounted for in this contributory component to an E/M.
Brief example of a note that clearly states the time spent, what was discussed and with who. This physician’s time and work performed is clearly stated and documented.
Coordination of care is usually documented in a time increment, because the physician is conducting work related to the patient, however there isn’t direct patient involvement, it has more to do with setting up transfers, counseling and documentation.
There are five types of presenting problems.
CPT explains that we are able to bill a visit for the physician when time is a DOMINATING factor and documented appropriately. Otherwise, go through the process of building a code with the key components.
And without further adieu, Lorraine will go over some common diagnosis issues the department has run into. Please take the time to listen, record and apply the information we’ve provided today. You’re all wonderful at what you do. Education is necessary to inform and stay on top of changing coding trends, so I’m very thankful for your time and attention.