Wiki To give a bullet, or not to give a bullet...

Create Wiki
btadlock1

btadlock1

Guest
Messages
1,502
Location
Lubbock, TX
Best answers
0
That is the question...:p

I've got some new ones to get everyone's thoughts on...Some I know, but some I'm not sure about, so I'll just copy all of them...I'm only interested in where you'd credit on 1997 guidelines, please - (I can't score it on 1995 due to our protocol.)

CC: Cough, SOB (COPD)

General: Awake. Alert. Appropriate.
Head: No sign of injury (<---I thought this one was odd)
Ears: No TM erythema, No edema. Landmarks clear.
Oropharynx: No erythema. No exudate.
Neck: Supple. No adenopathy, full ROM
Respiratory: Lungs CTA, respirations non-labored, breath sounds are equal. Symmetrical chest wall expansion. No chest wall tenderness
Cardiovascular: Regular rate and rhythm
GI: Soft. Bowel sounds active. Non-distended. Non-tender. No guarding, rigidity, distention or tenderness. (A little redundant...)
Neurological: CN II-XII intact
Integumentary: Warm Dry Pink & Intact
Psychological: AOx4

I've got bullets for:
2 Constitutional (vitals are also documented)
2 ENT: (otoscopic exam of TM, exam of oropharynx)
1 Neck: exam of neck
2 Resp: Ascultation of lungs, assessment of resp. effort
1 CV: ascultation of heart
2 GI: exam of abdomen, exam of liver/spleen (I count for 'no distention')
2 Musculoskeletal (neck, spine/ribs/pelvis): inspection and/or palpation w/notation of tenderness
1 neuro: Test Cranial nerves
1 psych: orientation to time, place, person

The things I'm unsure of are:
"Appropriate" - enough to count for psych, mood and affect?
"Landmarks clear" - :confused: I've never seen that before...
"No sign of injury" - that just seems so random...does it count for anything?
Are there any others that I might have missed? I'd like to make the provider's education as accurate as possible, so I want to give credit everywhere it's due...please let me know what you think! :)
 
My 2 cents

btadlock1 said:
That is the question...:p

I've got some new ones to get everyone's thoughts on...Some I know, but some I'm not sure about, so I'll just copy all of them...I'm only interested in where you'd credit on 1997 guidelines, please - (I can't score it on 1995 due to our protocol.)

CC: Cough, SOB (COPD)

General: Awake. Alert. Appropriate.
Head: No sign of injury (<---I thought this one was odd)
Ears: No TM erythema, No edema. Landmarks clear.
Oropharynx: No erythema. No exudate.
Neck: Supple. No adenopathy, full ROM
Respiratory: Lungs CTA, respirations non-labored, breath sounds are equal. Symmetrical chest wall expansion. No chest wall tenderness
Cardiovascular: Regular rate and rhythm
GI: Soft. Bowel sounds active. Non-distended. Non-tender. No guarding, rigidity, distention or tenderness. (A little redundant...)
Neurological: CN II-XII intact
Integumentary: Warm Dry Pink & Intact
Psychological: AOx4

I've got bullets for:
2 Constitutional (vitals are also documented)
2 ENT: (otoscopic exam of TM, exam of oropharynx)
1 Neck: exam of neck
2 Resp: Ascultation of lungs, assessment of resp. effort
1 CV: ascultation of heart
2 GI: exam of abdomen, exam of liver/spleen (I count for 'no distention')
2 Musculoskeletal (neck, spine/ribs/pelvis): inspection and/or palpation w/notation of tenderness
1 neuro: Test Cranial nerves
1 psych: orientation to time, place, person

The things I'm unsure of are:
"Appropriate" - enough to count for psych, mood and affect?
"Landmarks clear" - :confused: I've never seen that before...
"No sign of injury" - that just seems so random...does it count for anything?
Are there any others that I might have missed? I'd like to make the provider's education as accurate as possible, so I want to give credit everywhere it's due...please let me know what you think! :)
Click to expand...

Brandi: on your three question marks, here is my feedback:

"Appropriate" - I do not count that for psych unless specificallly documented. Appropriate what? (I may be too conservative, but I never have had a complaint!)

"Landmarks clear" - Landmarks for an ear exam usually involve any items of note that can be observed on the external ear, auditory canal, and/or TM. In this case, I would request clarificaion if the "landmarks" are an extention of the TM exam or if these refered to the external ear, in which you may give another. But if this is part of the canal/TM exam, no, I would not give another bullet.

"No sign of injury" - here I would give credit, as I interpret this as another way of documenting a normal exam.

Don't you LOVE these grey areas? When 1997 really is supposed to be more clear cut, right? :eek:

Anyway, that is one man's opinion, and you know what they say about opinions....
 
"No distension"

ONLY listing those areas where I differ from your assessment.

I would NOT count "no distension" as exam of liver and spleen. The abdomen can be distended for a large variety of reasons. I'd expect to see "no hepatosplenomegaly" to get this bullet.

"no sign of injury" .... the musculoskeletal bullet requires examination of "head AND neck" .... so no additional bullet for this. It DOES count towards your one MS bullet for head and neck.

Respiratory - I'm not sure I would count "symmetrical chest wall expansion" as a measure of respiratory effort. However I would count "no chest wall tenderness" as bullet for "palpation of chest.

Integumentary - 1 bullet for inspection of skin.

So I get
Constitutional ............ 2 bullets (taking your word on vitals)
Eyes ......................... 0
ENT .......................... 2
Neck ......................... 0 (I'm using this in musculoskeletal in conjunction w/ head)
Respiratory................. 2
CV............................. 1
Chest ........................ 0
GI.............................. 1
GU............................. 0
Lymphatic................... 0 (he did mention no adenopathy in neck, but you need TWO areas to get one bullet)
Musculoskeletal............1 (head and neck)
Skin............................1
Neurologic...................1
Psychiatric...................0

11 bullets = EPF exam

Hope that helps.

F Tessa Bartels, CPC, CEMC
 
FTessaBartels said:
ONLY listing those areas where I differ from your assessment.

I would NOT count "no distension" as exam of liver and spleen. The abdomen can be distended for a large variety of reasons. I'd expect to see "no hepatosplenomegaly" to get this bullet.

"no sign of injury" .... the musculoskeletal bullet requires examination of "head AND neck" .... so no additional bullet for this. It DOES count towards your one MS bullet for head and neck.

Respiratory - I'm not sure I would count "symmetrical chest wall expansion" as a measure of respiratory effort. However I would count "no chest wall tenderness" as bullet for "palpation of chest.

Integumentary - 1 bullet for inspection of skin.

So I get
Constitutional ............ 2 bullets (taking your word on vitals)
Eyes ......................... 0
ENT .......................... 2
Neck ......................... 0 (I'm using this in musculoskeletal in conjunction w/ head)
Respiratory................. 2
CV............................. 1
Chest ........................ 0
GI.............................. 1
GU............................. 0
Lymphatic................... 0 (he did mention no adenopathy in neck, but you need TWO areas to get one bullet)
Musculoskeletal............1 (head and neck)
Skin............................1
Neurologic...................1
Psychiatric...................0

11 bullets = EPF exam

Hope that helps.

F Tessa Bartels, CPC, CEMC
Click to expand...

Yes, I only count that for consistency's sake, on the first audit I do for each provider. Our EMR has that in the prompts, and they haven't been educated on the guidelines when I audit them, usually. I do inform them that I'm not really comfortable assigning credit for it, and that at minimum, I will expect to see 'no organomegaly' accompanying it, for future credit. It doesn't usually make or break the code selection, for most notes...

I count 1 Neck bullet for "supple", since that seems like an examination of the neck (eg, masses, overall appearance, symmetry, tracheal position, crepitus)

I decided against counting the 'no sign of injury' for 2 reasons:
1) it was totally irrelevant to the chief complaint, and I found it on several notes - it's like it's just there to take up space. Trailblazer makes it pretty clear that they wouldn't have counted it, under those circumstances, in the publication I referenced for the doctor.
2) I consider a 'sign of injury' to be open to interpretation, and wouldn't necessarily always quantify it as Musculoskeletal, although I do see the bullet you're talking about...My thinking on it is, a busted lip or black eye could both reasonably be signs of injury, and they don't really fall under M/S - also, there could be signs of a concussion that could appear in the eyes...I guess I just have a broad definition of the word "injury", really...

For the respiratory, the 'symmetrical chest wall expansion' isn't as much of the respiratory effort-assessment as the phrase "respirations non-labored", for me, although they both fit under the same general bullet.

I also give 2 bullets for Skin, which I forgot to put earlier:
Inspection: Pink & Intact
Palpation: Warm, dry
 
My take on your senario

Brandy,
When I initially began E&M coding I used 1997 exclusively, I have the bullets memorized.
So……Here is my audit of what you wrote: 15 Bullets, which would be a detailed exam
• CONSTITUTIONAL
o Vitals
o General appearance – awake/alert
• PSYCH
o Orientation – A & O X4
• ENMT
o External inspection of ears & nose – landmarks clear
o Otoscopic exam – No TM erythema
o Exam of oropharynx – No erythema
• NECK
o Exam of neck – Supple
• RESPIRATORY
o Respiratory effort – non labored
o Auscultation of lungs – CTA
• CARDIOVASCULAR
o Auscultation of heart
• GI
o Exam of abdomen – soft, non distended
• MUSCULOSKELETAL
o Assessment of ROM – Head & Neck
• SKIN
o Inspection of skin – pink and intact
o Palpation of skin – warm and dry
• NEUROLOGIC
o Test cranial nerves – CN II-XII
I would not get the exam of liver and spleen, I look for “no organomegaly� or “no hepatosplenomegaly� to give credit for that.
I personally prefer the 97 exam because even though there are still “grey� area's, I still believe it is more cut and dry than 95 guidelines!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top