Wiki "Skin" part of P.E.

Create Wiki
M

mhstrauss

True Blue
Messages
1,246
Location
Baton Rouge
Best answers
0
Quick question on something I came across in a follow up visit I was auditing. For the Skin part of the exam, provider only documented "Tattoos". Should he be given credit for that? I'm leaning towards no...since tattoos don't have much medical relevance. I expect to see things more like lesions, rash, scars, incisions healed, moles, etc. Anyone have any thoughts on this?
 
I have to agree with you on that. It's hard because they tell us to give the provider the benefit of the doubt but sometimes that hard to do.
 
I worked prison health care for a bit and we were told that it would not count unless the provider indicated the exact location of all tattoos. I have used this as a file of thumb. At times it will matter as to the number and locations.
 
mitchellde said:
I worked prison health care for a bit and we were told that it would not count unless the provider indicated the exact location of all tattoos. I have used this as a file of thumb. At times it will matter as to the number and locations.
Click to expand...

Debra, would the reasoning for documenting number/location be for identification purposes? Just curious...
 
That was part of it of course, so for new "arrivals" all we had to go on was their current provider record. But also the chief physician gave me a full course on the importance from a medical perspective of indication the number of tattoos and their specific locations ( you would be amazed!). Also if any can be deemed to be professional as opposed to self or friend obtained. It is quite interesting. But it can be important down the road.
 
mitchellde said:
That was part of it of course, so for new "arrivals" all we had to go on was their current provider record. But also the chief physician gave me a full course on the importance from a medical perspective of indication the number of tattoos and their specific locations ( you would be amazed!). Also if any can be deemed to be professional as opposed to self or friend obtained. It is quite interesting. But it can be important down the road.
Click to expand...

Very interesting! Do you know of any websites that outline this info? I'd love to read about it, just for my own personal knowledge.

Thank you both for the input!
 
Last edited:
Let me see if I have anything saved on this, it was several years ago. If I can remember the physicians name , I think he wrote an article on it.
 
I would give credit

Would you give credit if the provider said "no rashes seen"? That indicates the same work was performed as noting there are tattoos present.

The fact that they stated there are tattoos indicates they inspected the skin which is an exam element. I also disagree with the thought of not much medical relevance. Lots of nasty things can be related to tattoos including infections of the skin and exposure or potential exposure to a multitude of infectious diseases, like say hepatitis.

Just my two cents,

Laura, CPC, CPMA, CPC-I, CEMC
 
LLovett said:
Would you give credit if the provider said "no rashes seen"? That indicates the same work was performed as noting there are tattoos present.

The fact that they stated there are tattoos indicates they inspected the skin which is an exam element. I also disagree with the thought of not much medical relevance. Lots of nasty things can be related to tattoos including infections of the skin and exposure or potential exposure to a multitude of infectious diseases, like say hepatitis.

Just my two cents,

Laura, CPC, CPMA, CPC-I, CEMC
Click to expand...

Thank you, that is a very good point. We don't see many issues like that here, so I didn't think of it like that. Always something new to learn! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top