KGerlings
Guest
I am currently working with an IP pediatrics group. One of the physicians has some questions he would like to argue, and while I vehemently disagree, I am having a difficult time locating sound evidence in favor of either of out arguments. Any help would be wonderful!
Issue #1 We were reviewing a H&P with 4 problems, no additional work-up. 1- Seizure 2- Vomiting 3-Hematochezia 4- Diaper rash. I calculated 4 new problems, no additional work-up planned. This category has a max allowed of one problem x 3 points for a total of 3 points. The physician I am working with said he counted only one of the problems towards "new problem with no additional work-up" and he counted the other three problems, (with a max of two) for self-limited or minor. This gives him a total of 5 points. He agrees these are not self-limited or minor problems, but cannot fathom that one would receive fewer points (3) for taking care of several problems. He feels once the new problem maximum is fulfilled, all remaining problems should be considered under the self-limited or minor category. Anything more concrete I can show him to sway his opinion beyond pointing out that the category is designated only for self-limited or minor problems and these are not?
Issue #2 The patient is seen on day 1 with abdominal pain. On day 2 an x-ray reveals "significant fecal burden" with plan for an enema. The other physicians and myself agree that the abdominal pain on D1 is a sign/symptom of the fecal burden and therefore is an established problem. However, this one physician begs to argue that the fecal burden is a "new problem" because it was not present and documented on D1. Again, while I disagree with him, I am looking for something more concrete to prove this to him. Any ideas?
Thanks a ton!
Issue #1 We were reviewing a H&P with 4 problems, no additional work-up. 1- Seizure 2- Vomiting 3-Hematochezia 4- Diaper rash. I calculated 4 new problems, no additional work-up planned. This category has a max allowed of one problem x 3 points for a total of 3 points. The physician I am working with said he counted only one of the problems towards "new problem with no additional work-up" and he counted the other three problems, (with a max of two) for self-limited or minor. This gives him a total of 5 points. He agrees these are not self-limited or minor problems, but cannot fathom that one would receive fewer points (3) for taking care of several problems. He feels once the new problem maximum is fulfilled, all remaining problems should be considered under the self-limited or minor category. Anything more concrete I can show him to sway his opinion beyond pointing out that the category is designated only for self-limited or minor problems and these are not?
Issue #2 The patient is seen on day 1 with abdominal pain. On day 2 an x-ray reveals "significant fecal burden" with plan for an enema. The other physicians and myself agree that the abdominal pain on D1 is a sign/symptom of the fecal burden and therefore is an established problem. However, this one physician begs to argue that the fecal burden is a "new problem" because it was not present and documented on D1. Again, while I disagree with him, I am looking for something more concrete to prove this to him. Any ideas?
Thanks a ton!