if someone came in for a tdap (v06.1) and to see the physician would you link that to the e/m 99213
ex: 99213
90471
90715
401.9, v06.1
99213 diag 1 & 2
990471 diag 2
90715 Diag 2
if someone came in for a tdap (v06.1) and to see the physician would you link that to the e/m 99213
ex: 99213
90471
90715
401.9, v06.1
99213 diag 1 & 2
990471 diag 2
90715 Diag 2
if someone came in for a tdap (v06.1) and to see the physician would you link that to the e/m 99213
ex: 99213
90471
90715
401.9, v06.1
99213 diag 1 & 2
990471 diag 2
90715 Diag 2
YTHASKINS - why would you use the V05.9? it doesn't look like an adim code to anything - it appears to me, to be a very vague dx for some unspecified disease. They don't have a disease, they're getting a immunization-the admin code "is" the 90471 and is linked to the immunization code (V06.1 in this case) - accordingly if more than one vaccine given then 90472 x's however many and linked to the vaccine V-code.
Agreed, V05.9 is unnecessary. Just wondering why modifier 25 would be needed on the E/M with this? It's definitely needed if billing 90772 with an E/M, but most carriers recognize 90471 as a completely separate service. Since modifier 25 usage is always under scrutiny, perhaps bill some to your carriers without it when an immunization is given and if they don't reject you'll know it's no longer needed.
99213 - 401.9
90715 - V06.1
90471 - V06.1
Kris
Kris,
In my neck of the woods and the carriers we deal with we have to use the 25 modifier for 90471 and 90772 or else it doesn't get paid, it would be nice to not have to use it but....
I do agree with you on the cpt and dx you have listed for the procedures.