ABSTRACT
Background: Policymakers and payers are reevaluating the temporary telehealth flexibilities granted during the COVID-19 public health emergency, which will shape future teledermatology utilization. Objective: To summarize the recently expanded telehealth flexibilities in the United States, projected changes, and corresponding implications for dermatologists. Methods: Narrative review of the literature, United States policies and regulations, and white paper reports. Results: Key telehealth flexibilities included expansion of payment parity, relaxation of originating site requirements, loosening of state licensure requirements, and HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996) enforcement discretion. These changes enabled widespread accessibility and adoption of teledermatology, which enhanced high-quality and cost-effective dermatologic care. Most waivers will end 151 days following the end of the public health emergency declaration. Notably, asynchronous telehealth was not included in the reimbursement expansion. Limitations: Only policies and regulations through December 2022 are included. Conclusion: It will be important for the field of dermatology to stay abreast of the upcoming changes in telemedicine policies and reimbursement, to demonstrate teledermatology's value through evidence-based studies and to advocate for enduring policies that will promote the accessibility of teledermatology for patients.
ABSTRACT
Background Competent medical coding is key to maintaining a successful dermatology practice. Resident billing performance can have significant financial implications for the academic institutions employing them. During their residency training, dermatology residents commonly find themselves responsible for the billing of patient encounters. However, despite the importance of adequate knowledge and skill in medical coding, recent data show inadequacies in this aspect of resident education. The goal of this study is to evaluate the impact of an interventional coding curriculum on dermatology residents' billing accuracy at our institution. Methodology Billing data, including evaluation and management (E/M) level of service, procedural codes, and current procedural terminology modifiers (if applicable) were queried from the electronic medical records (EMR) at a resident clinic seeing patients on three half-days each week. Billing codes were gathered from patient visits occurring in two separate time periods, before and after the intervention. The intervention consisted of monthly resident lectures on E/M and procedural billing in outpatient dermatology with associated quizzes. Billing accuracy was verified by three attending dermatologists through chart review and compared between the two time periods. Results Overall, billing data from 532 patient visits, 267 from the pre-intervention period and 265 from the post-intervention period, were checked for accuracy. The accuracy of resident-billed E/M levels of service was similar between the pre- and post-intervention periods (44.3% vs. 44.8%). Similar rates of undercoding and overcoding were noted between the pre- and post-intervention periods (35.2% undercoded and 8% overcoded vs. 35.7% and 8.9%, respectively). However, substantial improvements were noted in the rate of errors with procedural codes and modifiers in the post-intervention period. Overall, 21.9% of procedural codes were incorrectly billed pre-intervention compared to 3.7% post-intervention (p < 0.05). Moreover, 55.2% of modifiers were incorrectly billed pre-intervention versus 27.3% post-intervention (p < 0.05). Conclusions Our analysis suggests that billing lectures yielded a clear improvement in resident billing accuracy at our institution. While there was no improvement in E/M coding, there was a significant improvement in the usage of procedural codes and modifiers. Similar analyses can be used by other residency programs to monitor resident billing performance and the efficacy of educational programs on medical billing.