Johnson & Johnson Vaccine Gets New CPT Code

Johnson & Johnson Vaccine Gets New CPT CodeJohnson & Johnson’s new Covid-19 Vaccine awaits approval and it is important to look at the coding and billing ahead of time. New vaccine CPT codes have been released for the vaccine and staying up to date will keep you in best practice once the vaccine is distributed. Read below to get the full story.  nnAs new COVID-19 vaccines continue to be approved and distributed it is important to make sure you are correctly coding, and billing based on the vaccine given.nAhead of the approval of the new Johnson and Johnson COVID-19 vaccine, the AMA has added a new CPT code 91303 (Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2] [COVID-19] vaccine, DNA, spike protein, adenovirus type 26 [Ad26] vector, preservative free, 5×1010 viral particles/0.5 mL dosage, for intramuscular use).nnIn addition to this new vaccine code, there is also a new HCPCS code 0031A (Immunization administration by intramuscular injection of SARS-CoV-2 [COVID-19] vaccine, DNA, spike protein, Ad26 vector, preservative free, 5×1010 viral particles/0.5 mL dosage, single dose) for administration.nnThis code will take affect immediately following approval of the vaccine by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). As of this writing, it is still pending approval.

What Rev Cycles Need to Know About the No Surprises Act

What Rev Cycles Need to Know About the No Surprises ActnnWhat the rev cycles need to know about the “No Surprises Act” can help with understanding the new legislation coming January 2022. The legislation is set to protect patients from surprise medical bills and provide protections within network care. Continue reading below to keep yourself updated on the new legislation. nnJust as revenue cycle executives are coming up for air from the CMS price transparency mandate, they have another date to add to their compliance calendar: January 1, 2022. That’s the day that the No Surprises Act goes into effect. The legislation has two main parts. First, it protects patients from surprise medical bills. “Under the recently announced No Surprises Act, patients will only have to pay the in-network cost-sharing responsibilities for their care, while payers and providers will negotiate payment for the rest,” Rob LaHayne, CEO of TouchCare, a healthcare concierge service, tells HealthLeaders via email.nnThe No Surprises Act also establishes an independent dispute resolution (IDR) process for payers and providers. “It takes consumers out of the middle of the dispute between the payer and the provider,” says Becky Greenfield, partner with Wolfe Pincavage, a Miami law firm specializing in healthcare, insurance coverage, and business law.nnARBITRATION 101nThe IDR will use a “baseball-style” arbitration to settle disputes between payers and providers. Each of the parties will offer a payment amount, and an independent arbitrator will choose one offer or the other, rather than an amount in between. “That incentivizes those parties to [each] make a reasonable offer,” Greenfield says. This so-called “final-offer arbitration” process can help prevent the parties from making bids that are either too high or too low.nn”The incentive created by arbitration brings some elements of market dynamics into the dispute-resolution process,” says Benjamin L. Chartock, associate fellow at the Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics and lead author of a recent Health Affairs study about arbitration in out-of-network medical bill payment disputes in New Jersey. “A more extreme offer by one of the parties in arbitration helps them financially if they win but might lower the probability that they win.” In advocating for a dispute resolution process, hospitals had been pushing for arbitration, whereas payers had called for benchmark payments, such as ones tied to median in-network rates.nn”This process edges the surprise billing issue closer to the dispute resolution and regulatory structure common in many of today’s workers’ compensation structures, where most states removed patient liability well over two decades ago,” notes Scott Bennett, vice president of access innovation at Maestro Health, via email.nnCONSUMER PROTECTIONSnFrom a consumer perspective, the No Surprises Act essentially makes out-of-network balance billing a thing of the past. That’s especially important for patients who live in states that don’t already have such protections in place. According to the Commonwealth Fund, 18 states have no balance billing protections in place. The rest have comprehensive or partial protections. “It requires that insurers apply the in-network, out-of-pocket benefits to emergency services and [to] out-of-network services in in-network facilities,” Greenfield says, such as services provided by an out-of-network anesthesiologist working in an in-network facility. “Not only can you not be billed the difference between what the insurer pays and what the provider bills, you also cannot apply out-of-network deductibles to these types of services,” she says.nnAccording to an announcement from the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions, the legislation:n

    n

  • Holds patients harmless from surprise medical bills, including from air ambulance providers, by ensuring they are only responsible for their in-network cost-sharing amounts, including deductibles, in both emergency situations and certain non-emergency situations where patients do not have the ability to choose an in-network provider
  • n

  • Prohibits certain out-of-network providers from balance billing patients unless the provider gives the patient notice of the network status and an estimate of charges 72 hours prior to receiving out-of-network services and the patient provides consent to receive out-of-network care
  • n

  • Provides additional consumer protections when insurance companies change networks, including a transition of care for people with complex care needs and appeal rights for consumers
  • n

  • Provides a true and honest cost estimate that describes which providers will deliver their treatment, the cost of services, and provider network status
  • n

nREVENUE CYCLE CONSIDERATIONSnAlthough the legislation won’t go into effect for nearly a year, there are things that revenue cycle executives should be thinking about and working on as they prepare.nn1. Establish processes to end balance billing: “First and foremost—especially if you’re not in a state that already has balance billing protections—you need to establish a process to make sure that patients are not balance billed,” Greenfield says.nn2. Get ready to provide estimates: Providers also must prepare to give patients a “true and honest cost estimate.” “Those processes need to be in place,” according to Greenfield. “[Revenue cycle] staff needs to be trained on this as well to make sure that they’re compliant, because there are civil monetary penalties involved for noncompliance.”nn3. Remember that arbitration costs money: Chartock notes that “arbitration is not free,” so providers need to consider their dispute resolution options. “Disputing parties have the option as well to resolve these payment disputes for out-of-network bills offline and, if I were in a situation like that, I would carefully consider doing that as well,” he says.nn4. Pay attention to the details: Although the No Surprises Act was signed into law, more details are still coming. For example, the Commonwealth Fund notes that “Federal officials will have to establish a list of eligible arbitrators and help interpret the factors that will guide arbitrators’ decisions.” “There is still a rule-making period that must take place between the passage of the law and when it begins to take effect,” Chartock says. “We know the text of the law, but not the intricate details of how the law will be enacted.”nn nnOriginal article published on healthleadersmedia.com 

January is National Mentorship Month

January is National Mentorship MonthJanuary is National Mentorship Month! This is the month of the year to celebrate mentorship for professional and personal development for individuals across the United States. As we wrap up January, think of how mentors in our lives have impacted us and how we can continue to mentor the future to make our communities stronger and healthier.nnOne of my favorite quotes; “We learn… 10% of what we read, 20% of what we hear, 30% of what we see, 50% of what we both hear and see, 70% of what is discussed, 80% of what we experience personally, 95% of what we teach to someone else” -William Glasser.nnEach year as you look to the future and the goals you hope to achieve in the new year, one cannot overlook how your goals can be enhanced through mentorship. Whether you choose to be a mentor or request mentorship from some else it is a great opportunity to gain knowledge and camaraderie in your goals and support someone else in theirs.nn“A mentor is someone who sees more talent and ability within you, than you see in yourself, and helps bring it out of you.” -Bob Proctor.n

CMS Puts Patients Over Paperwork

CMS Puts Patients Over PaperworkCMS puts patients over paperwork with a new rule that addresses the prior authorization process. The new rule will empower patients, lower costs, and give providers the ability to give better care to their patients. Continue reading below to learn more about the new final rule.nnToday, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) finalized a signature accomplishment of the new Office of Burden Reduction & Health Informatics (OBRHI). This final rule builds on the efforts to drive interoperability, empower patients, and reduce costs and burden in the healthcare market by promoting secure electronic access to health data in new and innovative ways. These significant changes include allowing certain payers, providers and patients to have electronic access to pending and active prior authorization decisions, which should result in fewer repeated requests for prior authorizations, reducing costs and onerous administrative burden to our frontline providers. This final rule will result in providers having more time to focus on their patients and provide higher quality care.nn“Today, we take a historic stride toward the future long promised by electronic health records but never yet realized: a more efficient, convenient, and affordable healthcare system,” said CMS Administrator Seema Verma. “Thanks to this rule, millions of patients will no longer have to wrangle with prior providers or locate ancient fax machines to take possession of their own data. Many providers, too, will be freed from the burden of piecing together patients’ health histories based on incomplete, half-forgotten snippets of information supplied by the patients themselves, as well as the most onerous elements of prior authorization. This change will reverberate around the healthcare system for years and decades to come.”nnThe “CMS Interoperability and Prior Authorization” rule is the next phase of CMS interoperability rulemaking, aimed at improving data exchange while simultaneously reducing provider and patient burden. This final rule requires the payers regulated under this rule (namely, Medicaid and CHIP managed care plans, state Medicaid and CHIP fee-for-service programs (FFS) and issuers of individual market Qualified Health Plans (QHPs) on the Federally-facilitated exchanges (FFEs)) to implement application programing interfaces (APIs) that will give providers better access to data about their patients, and streamline the process of prior authorization. APIs are the foundation of smartphone applications, and when integrated with a provider’s electronic health record (EHR), they can enable data access at the touch of a button. By exchanging relevant health information between patients, providers and payers, APIs support a better health care experience for patients. Patients have easier access to their own health information, their providers have a more complete picture of their care, and patients can take their information with them as they move from plan to plan, and from provider to provider throughout the healthcare system. This ensures more coordinated, quality care, and less repetitive and unnecessary care that is costly.nnToday’s final rule requires Medicaid and CHIP (FFS) programs, Medicaid and CHIP managed care plans, and issuers of individual market QHPs on the FFEs to include, as part of the already established Patient Access API, claims and encounter data, including laboratory results, and information about the patient’s pending and active prior authorization decisions. These payers are also required to share this data directly with patients’ providers if they ask for it and with other payers as the patient moves from one payer to another. In this way, patients, providers, and payers have the data when and where they need it, to help ensure that patients receive the best possible care. While Medicare Advantage plans are not included in and therefore not subject to this final rule, CMS is considering whether to do so in future rulemaking.nnPrior Authorization Burden ReductionnnPayers use prior authorization as a way to manage health care costs and ensure payment accuracy. For certain services, providers request approval from payers before rendering care to ensure that the payer will determine that the care is medically necessary, a threshold requirement for care to be reimbursed under the patients’ health coverage. This administrative process can be burdensome, and the challenges of the prior authorization process have motivated industry efforts to develop tools to increase automation. This final rule aims to reduce the inefficiencies and burdens of the prior authorization process for providers, and give them back time to focus on what matters most, treating patients in a timely manner.nnThe final rule requires Medicaid and CHIP FFS programs, Medicaid and CHIP managed care plans, and issuers of individual market QHPs on the FFEs to build, implement, and maintain APIs using the Health Level 7 (HL7) Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) standard to support automation of the prior authorization process, specifically addressing the challenges raised by both providers and payers. The requirements of this rule specify that each of these payers will build an API-enabled documentation requirements look-up service, and make these public so providers may access documentation and prior authorization requirements from their EHR platforms. Once a provider knows what is required for each prior authorization, the next step is submitting it electronically. The final rule also requires Medicaid, CHIP, and QHP payers to implement and maintain prior authorization support APIs using the HL7 FHIR standard, which will advance a streamlined approach for communicating prior authorization requests and responses between those payers and provider EHR platforms or other practice management systems.nnThe final rule also requires Medicaid and CHIP (FFS) programs, and Medicaid and CHIP managed care plans to meet reduced decision timelines for prior authorizations. These payers will now have a maximum of 72 hours to make prior authorization decisions on urgent requests and seven calendar days for non-urgent requests, and all payers subject to the rule are required to provide a specific reason for any denial, which will allow providers some transparency into the process beginning January 1, 2024 or the rating period that starts on or after January 1, 2024. In addition, to promote accountability, the rule requires these payers, to make public, prior authorization metrics that demonstrate how they operationalize the prior authorization process. All of these requirements together will promote a more streamlined and efficient prior authorization process for providers and payers alike.nnThe rule will improve the patient experience as well. When a patient sees, for instance that a prior authorization is needed and has been submitted for a particular item or service, they will better understand the timeline for the process and be able to work with their provider to plan accordingly.nnToday’s final rule aims to improve longstanding inefficiencies in the healthcare system —including the lack of data sharing and access. This final rule expands the current Administration’s goals of quality and lower costs in health care as payers and providers will now have access to more complete patient histories, allowing for more coordinated and seamless patient care.n

Click here to review the final rule.

n nnOriginal article published on cms.gov

New HCPCS Code G2212 for Prolonged Services

New HCPCS Code G2212 for Prolonged ServicesThere is a new HCPCS code G2212 for prolonged services with or without direct patient contact on the date of service. This new code has changes that influence when extra time starts during patient encounters. Continue reading below to learn more.nnWith All the changes come up in 2021 for Office and Outpatient encounters, if you are a CMS credentialed provider this topic cannot be emphasized enough. Part of the overhaul of the Evaluation and Management (E/M) guideline changes was the creation of a prolonged service code, 99417. Unfortunately, the requirements for this code will not be support by CMS, thus the creation of HCPCS code G2212. Below you will see two tables taken directly from CMS Manual, transmittal 10505.nnThe biggest difference is that extra time does not start once the maximum time for your base code, 99205 or 99215, has been exceeded but rather it begins at minute 89. (i.e. if your total encounter time for a particular encounter was 100 minutes, according to CPT you would report 99205 + 99417×2 vs. CMS you would report 99205 + G2212x1).nnThese charts should be printed out and added to you CPT manual for comparison to what AMA has released for code 99417 or kept in with your other quick reference tools.nn nnNew HCPCS Code G2212 for Prolonged Servicesnn n

Click here to view the CMS Manual System

30 FAQ’s to Start Your 2021 Reporting Off Right

30 FAQ’s to Start Your 2021 Reporting Off RightA new year means new CPT changes have been released. These changes apply to E/M office and other outpatient visit reporting. We’ve compiled a list of 30 FAQ’s so that you can start your 2021 reporting off right. Continue reading below to learn more.nnBy Ginger Avery, CPC, CPMA, CRCnJanuary 5, 2021nn1.Where can the CPT E/M code and guidelines be found? The CPT E/M code and guideline changes for 2021 can not only be found on the American Medical Associations (AMA) site at this link, but they can also be found in their entirety within the 2021 CPT Code books themselves. These guidelines include the new level of medical decision-making table and the 22 new definitions that help clarify what the MDM terms mean.nn2.Does pulling the lab results into the note constitute a “review of results” or do I need to document by stating that I have reviewed them? Moving forward information from old notes without comment does not add any value to the work that was performed and does not count. Did you review/analyze these results, what impact does this have on today’s visit? What is the clinical significance of this additional work?nn3.When tests are ordered during one visit and reviewed the same test during the next visit, can that count as a data point for both visits? With the new guidelines, we no longer have data “points”. Both encounters would support Limited data (low) with Category 1. The first encounter supports Category 1 for ordering of the test, the follow up encounter would support Category 1 for review of the results.nn4.Where does lifestyle counseling come into this? Preventive medicine counseling and/or risk factor reduction interventions (99401-99412) are time-based codes but do NOT follow the office visit E/M guidelines. Relevant visit details and total F2F time should be documented appropriately. Code selection is based on the F2F time spent with the patient.nn5.When reporting for total time, is it just time spent with patient at the encounter? No, in 2021, time is defined as the total encounter time on the date of service. This includes both F2F work and non-F2F work personally performed by the clinician.nn6.When dealing with complex patients where time is difficult to track will we have to revert to Medical Decision Making? With the new guidelines, you now have a choice, MDM or total encounter time. If total encounter time runs outside of the date of service or is challenging to track, then reporting based on the medical decision making may be a better choice. Do not undervalue the complexity by not documenting all the relevant work you do.nn7.Seeing how we cannot estimate for time that could be spent, say for a possible follow up phone call, how should we code to earn credit for that work? Time based reporting is only appropriate for time spent on the date of the encounter. Follow up phone calls on a later date cannot be reported based on time. MDM should be considered. In column 2 of the level of MDM chart, Category 3 provides credit when discussing the case with other clinicians or appropriate source. Be sure to document these details when true.nn8.Providers do use outpatient codes in the hospital if patient is in Observation status “not Inpatient”, I would assume these rules would apply to bill new/vs est pt when appropriate? Yes, the guideline updates are for office visits and other outpatient services.nn9.With the new time-based reporting, it seems that we absolutely need to sign off on our notes on the day of service. This is not always feasible given a busy day. In 2021, total encounter time includes completing documentation. If a clinician is unable to complete their note on the date of the encounter, reporting based on MDM may be a better choice.nn10.Some of these activities occur after the visit (complications/adverse reactions) – how can you account for that in your note for that day? Complications and adverse reactions may support an additional encounter when the need for evaluation and management may arise but would not be included on the date of the encounter unless that presentation was true during the visit.nn11.Do the E/M changes apply to outpatient or inpatient services? The 2021 E/M changes only apply to Outpatient services. Inpatient visits still need to follow the key component guidelines (1995 or 1997).nn12.Since history and physical exam are no longer required to level the visit, should these elements still be documented? Yes, history and exam are still part of an evaluation. The documented content should be focused on the clinically relevant details and cognitive thoughts of the clinician, not checkboxes or templated details. What is the nature of the presenting illness(es) (subject details with pertinent ROS)? Document a medically necessary exam. Documentation is about the quality of the story, not the quantity of details. Don’t import pages of past medical history or medication lists that aren’t relevant. Clinicians are encouraged to write notes that they would like to read.nn13.Do I still have to document ROS and PFSH? Yes, when clinically relevant. For example: Patient presents with chest pain. Has been having intermittent chest pain at rest for two weeks. No notable triggers. Positive for headaches and dizziness, no SOB. Patient has a past family history of CAD. Remember, documentation is all about the medically necessary story.nn14.When coding based on total time does the assessment and plan still need to be documented? Yes. Quality documentation should always be captured. Clinical impressions and plans that are well documented support the medical necessity for the services provided, regardless of how you choose to report the visit. Again, clinicians are encouraged to write notes that they would like to read.nn15.When coding based on total time and have also provided additional time-based services (advance care planning, counseling, etc.) how should those services be documented? The time associated with each visit should be separate and clearly identified to support each unique service.nn16.Are commercial plans required to adopt the revisions to E/M codes? Yes. The CPT code set, together with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System, has been adopted as the nation’s standard medical data code set. HIPAA requires that health plans use the most recent version of the medical data code set, they should be ready to implement the revisions Jan. 1, 2021.nn17.Who else besides clinicians needs to implement the 2021 E/M office visit changes? Other clinicians, coders, third-party plan administrators, and other health care-related entities should start using the revised code set Jan. 1. Physician practices should confirm that their contracted health plans and EHR vendors are integrating the revised codes into their software systems and will be ready Jan. 1, 2021.nn18.Can I still use my EHR’s coding calculator? Technically, Yes. It is important that clinicians confirm with their EHR vendor that their system’s code-selection application conforms to the revised codes and descriptors because the billing provider has the ultimate responsibility for appropriate coding. The EHR’s coding calculators are simply bean counters driven by templates and checkboxes; medically necessity cannot be quantified utilizing a point counting system. Often these systems are not set up with the appropriate guidelines and do not include additional instruction.nn19.Can we still bill 99201-99205 and 99211-99215 based on the 1995 and 1997 guidelines for dates of service on and after January 1, 2021? Office/outpatient visits PRIOR to January 1, 2021 may still be billed using the 1995 or 1997 guidelines. Clinicians must bill office/outpatient visits provided ON or AFTER January 1, 2021 using the CPT E/M code and guideline changes for 2021. Note: Based on the CPT changes, code 99201 is no longer valid for dates of service on and after January 1, 2021.nn20.Do the 2021 E/M code and guideline changes apply to all categories of E/M services? No. The E/M code and guideline changes are specific for office and other outpatient visits and apply only to codes 99201–99205 and 99211–99215.nn21.For dates of service on and after January 1, 2021, how are the levels of E/M services provided in an office/outpatient setting determined? For dates of service on and after January 1, 2021, select the appropriate level of E/M service based on the following (you choose): The level of the medical decision making as defined for each service; OR the total time personally spent by the clinician for all services related and dedicated to that patient on the date of the encounter.nn22.Does the revised medical decision-making table for 2021 provided by the AMA apply to all E/M services? No. The CPT E/M code and guideline changes for 2021 and subsequent MDM table only apply to office/outpatient E/M services beginning January 1, 2021. All other E/M categories and codes continue to follow the 1995 and/or 1997 E/M guidelines. However, the additional clarification provided in the new guidelines displays the importance of documenting clinically significant details (medically necessary), avoiding templated checkbox information and provides definitions for many of the terms on the table of risk to help the reader understand appropriate considerations of Medical Decision Making.nn23.Is the documentation of history and examination required when scoring office/outpatient services under the revised 2021 guidelines? The approved revisions do not materially change the three current MDM elements, but instead provide extensive edits to the elements for code selection and revised or created numerous clarifying definitions in the E/M guidelines. While the provider’s work in capturing the patient’s pertinent history and performing a relevant physical exam contributes to both the time and medical decision making, these elements alone should not determine the appropriate code level. The revised code descriptors state a “medically appropriate history and/or examination” is required.nn24.Is time defined differently for office and outpatient E/M services effective for dates of service on and after January 1, 2021? According to the AMA, for dates of service on and after January 1, 2021, time is defined as minimum time, not typical time, and represents the total encounter time personally spent by the clinician on the date of service. This definition applies only when code selection is based on time and not MDM.nIs time defined differently for office and outpatient E/M services effective for dates of service on and after January 1, 2021? According to the AMA, for dates of service on and after January 1, 2021, time is defined as minimum time, not typical time, and represents the total encounter time personally spent by the clinician on the date of service. This definition applies only when code selection is based on time and not MDM.nn25.When coding by time, is the day of encounter by calendar date or 24-hour period? When coding by time, only the time spend on the actual calendar date of the encounter is applicable.nn26.How is time counted under the CPT E/M code and guideline changes for 2021? Except for code 99211, per AMA, beginning with CPT changes 2021, time alone may be used to select the appropriate code level for the office or other outpatient E/M service codes (99202-99205, 99212- 99215). Time may be used to select a code level in office or other outpatient services regardless or not counseling and/or coordination of care dominates the service. When time is used to select the appropriate level for E/M service codes, time is defined by the service descriptors. The E/M services for which these guidelines apply require a face-to-face encounter with the clinician. For office or other outpatient services, if the clinician’s time is spent in the supervision of clinical staff who perform the face-to-face services of the encounter, use code 99211.nn27.What activities can be counted towards total clinician time? Time includes the following activities when personally performed by the clinician:n

    n

  • Preparing to see the patient (e.g., review of tests).
  • n

  • Obtaining and/or reviewing separately obtained history.
  • n

  • Performing a medically appropriate examination and/or evaluation.
  • n

  • Counseling and educating the patient/family/caregiver.
  • n

  • Ordering medications, tests, or procedures.
  • n

  • Referring and communicating with other health care professionals (when not separately reported).
  • n

  • Documenting clinical information in the electronic or other health record.
  • n

  • Independently interpreting results (not separately reported) and communicating results to the patient/family/caregiver.
  • n

  • Care coordination (not separately reported).
  • n

n28.How do other requirements (e.g., teaching physician, incident to, new vs. established) apply when using the CPT E/M guidelines for 2021? CMS is adopting the AMA’s guidance on coding office/outpatient E/M visits. Most rules remain unchanged.nn29.Can the independent visualization of a test be counted in the medical decision making if the physician is also billing for the test? Per AMA, the actual performance and/or interpretation of diagnostic tests/studies during a patient encounter are not included in determining the level of E/M service when reported separately. Clinician performance of diagnostic tests/studies for which specific CPT codes are available may be reported separately, in addition to the appropriate E/M code. The clinician’s interpretation of the results of diagnostic tests/studies (i.e., professional component) with preparation of a separate distinctly identifiable signed written report may also be reported separately, using the appropriate CPT code and, if required, with modifier 26 appended. If a test/study is independently interpreted in order to manage the patient as part of the E/M service but is not separately reported; it is part of medical decision making.nn30.When considering High Risk MDM, there is an example listed: “drug therapy requiring intensive monitoring for toxicity”. What constitutes supporting this definition? When considering this complexity, both the drug and the monitoring must qualify. The new guidelines provide this definition when considering this High Risk example: “Drug therapy requiring intensive monitoring for toxicity: A drug that requires intensive monitoring is a therapeutic agent that has the potential to cause serious morbidity or death. The monitoring is performed for assessment of these adverse effects and not primarily for assessment of therapeutic efficacy. The monitoring should be that which is generally accepted practice for the agent but may be patient specific in some cases. Intensive monitoring may be long-term or short term. Long-term intensive monitoring is not less than quarterly. The monitoring may be by a lab test, a physiologic test or imaging. Monitoring by history or examination does not qualify. The monitoring affects the level of medical decision making in an encounter in which it is considered in the management of the patient. Examples may include monitoring for a cytopenia in the use of an antineoplastic agent between dose cycles or the short-term intensive monitoring of electrolytes and renal function in a patient who is undergoing diuresis. Examples of monitoring that does not qualify include monitoring glucose levels during insulin therapy as the primary reason is the therapeutic effect (even if hypoglycemia is a concern); or annual electrolytes and renal function for a patient on a diuretic as the frequency does not meet the threshold.”nnAs a reminder, documentation is about painting a clear picture of today’s encounter. The power of storytelling is evident with these new revisions. Quality documentation (not quantity or checkboxes) provides details to support the medical necessity and appropriate complexity of each unique encounter, as well as improves overall patient care and clinical outcomes. Clinicians are encouraged to focus their energy and documentation on the cognitive clinically relevant details, regardless of the clinical setting. Document what you do, code what you document.nn Welter Healthcare Partners provides robust coding and documentation training for these updates, as well as other topics. Please contact cwhitworth@rtwelter.com to book your training now.nnReferences:nAMA CPT® E/M Code and Guideline Changes for 2021nAma-assn.orgnNovitas E/M Documentation RequirementsnNoridian E/M Documentation Requirements