Hello,
Is there a causal relationship (presumed, no provider linkage needed) between Pathological fracture and neoplastic disease? Neoplastic disease is under the sub-term 'due to'. If I pick a location such as L ankle (initial encounter for fracture), the dx is M84.572A-Pathological fracture "in" neoplastic disease, left ankle, initial encounter for fracture.
Per coding guidelines, Section I.A.15, it states- The word "with" or "in' should be interpreted to mean "associated with" or "due to" when it appears in a code title, the Alpha Index or an instructional note in the Tabular List.
What is defined as the code title? Is it the diagnostic statement the provider documents, or is it the code found after looking up the condition under 'due to' in the Alpha Index?
This question has come up, because I always thought that the provider has to link the two terms together if there is a 'due to'.
Thank you for your help.
Is there a causal relationship (presumed, no provider linkage needed) between Pathological fracture and neoplastic disease? Neoplastic disease is under the sub-term 'due to'. If I pick a location such as L ankle (initial encounter for fracture), the dx is M84.572A-Pathological fracture "in" neoplastic disease, left ankle, initial encounter for fracture.
Per coding guidelines, Section I.A.15, it states- The word "with" or "in' should be interpreted to mean "associated with" or "due to" when it appears in a code title, the Alpha Index or an instructional note in the Tabular List.
What is defined as the code title? Is it the diagnostic statement the provider documents, or is it the code found after looking up the condition under 'due to' in the Alpha Index?
This question has come up, because I always thought that the provider has to link the two terms together if there is a 'due to'.
Thank you for your help.
Last edited: