I completely agree with iheartcoding. I have been saying for a long time that too many are passing the CPC and that AAPC needs to set the bar higher. Just looking at all the names in the AAPC publication every month who've passed surely is an indicator that something needs to be done.
The passing score needs to be raised for sure but some new elements need to be added to show a more thorough understanding of coding.
Fill in the blank spaces for operative notes to include providing CPT and ICD-9 codes would be a good start. Perhaps 20 questions in that format and make the test 120 questions instead of 150. Nothing too difficult but sufficient to show "knowledge".
On the subject of answering B for every question, I would agree that it would never lead to a passing score.
A colleague of mine retook the CPC recently and there was a guy there boring everyone before the test, proudly announcing that he was first to finish on his last attempt at CPC. Well, on this next try he finished in 2 hours!
Now, I don't know about you, but it would almost take me 2 hours to thoroughly read all the questions and find out what the question was looking for. Perhaps answering B was his way (although, given the choice, I'd go for C myself). Inevitably he must have guessed a lot of answers. Not a true indicator of coding knowledge for sure.
The ball is in AAPC's court and I get the feeling that as long as the money's coming in, they really don't care how many hold the "gold standard" coding certification.
An inappropriate description if ever there was one.
