Pulmonology Coding Alert

Reader Question:

Correct Use of Modifiers Improves Reimbursements

Question: Our pulmonologist recently performed two tests for influenza A and B using a test sample and differentiating test kit. We reported the procedure with 87804 x 2. We got paid for only one unit of 87804 and the other test was rejected. Are we wrong in our claim for the second test?Indiana SubscriberAnswer: You are not wrong in your claims for two units of 87804 (Infectious agent antigen detection by immunoassay with direct optical observation; Influenza) as two different and distinct analyses for each influenza type was conducted. However, a majority of the insurance carriers will not pay for the second test indicating that the second test is considered to be duplicative.However, in order to distinguish the second test as a distinct test, you can append modifier 59 (Distinct procedural service) to the second test. This could be a way out to get paid for both the tests. So, [...]
You’ve reached your limit of free articles. Already a subscriber? Log in.
Not a subscriber? Subscribe today to continue reading this article. Plus, you’ll get:
  • Simple explanations of current healthcare regulations and payer programs
  • Real-world reporting scenarios solved by our expert coders
  • Industry news, such as MAC and RAC activities, the OIG Work Plan, and CERT reports
  • Instant access to every article ever published in Revenue Cycle Insider
  • 6 annual AAPC-approved CEUs
  • The latest updates for CPT®, ICD-10-CM, HCPCS Level II, NCCI edits, modifiers, compliance, technology, practice management, and more

Other Articles in this issue of

Pulmonology Coding Alert

View All

Which Codify by AAPC tool is right for you?

Call 844-334-2816 to speak with a Codify by AAPC specialist now.