Procedural Coding for Interventional Pain Management.

Interventional radiologists' involvement in pain service lines continues to increase. While clinical and technical acumen is an obvious prerequisite, understanding the coding related to these procedures is also a must. The pain specialist's practice is largely outpatient based, therefore, the coding and subsequent billing for outpatient clinic visits may be an important revenue generator. A brief review of the evaluation and management (E&M) coding, as well as review of procedural CPT coding for pain interventions is discussed herein. While not overly difficult, there are certain nuances regarding the coding and reporting of these procedures. Developing an understanding of the proper use of CPT coding involved in pain procedures will allow the interventionalist to accurately capture the work performed and further support a pain service line. Case examples are used to reinforce certain points.

Financial Effect of Unbundling Moderate Sedation from Procedural Codes in Radiology.

PURPOSE: To assess and quantify the financial effect of unbundling newly unbundled moderate sedation codes across major payors at an academic radiology practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Billing and reimbursement data for 23 months of unbundled moderate sedation codes were analyzed for reimbursement rates and trends. This included 10,481 and 28,189 units billed and $443,257 and $226,444 total receipts for codes 99152 (initial 15 minutes of moderate sedation) and 99153 (each subsequent 15 minute increment of moderate sedation), respectively. Five index procedures-(i) central venous port placement, (ii) endovascular tumor embolization, (iii) tunneled central venous catheter placement, (iv) percutaneous gastrostomy placement, and (v) percutaneous nephrostomy placement-were identified, and moderate sedation reimbursements for Medicare and the dominant private payor were calculated and compared to pre-bundled reimbursements. Revenue variation models across different patient insurance mixes were then created using averages from 4 common practice settings among radiologists (independent practices, all hospitals, safety-net hospitals, and non-safety-net hospitals). RESULTS: Departmental reimbursement for unbundled moderate sedation in FY2018 and FY2019 totaled $669,701.34, with high per-unit variability across payors, especially for code 99153. Across the 5 index procedures, moderate sedation reimbursement decreased 1.3% after unbundling and accounted for 3.9% of procedural revenue from Medicare and increased 11.9% and accounted for 5.5% of procedural revenue from the dominant private payor. Between different patient insurance mix models, estimated reimbursement from moderate sedation varied by as much as 29.9%. CONCLUSIONS: Departmental reimbursement from billing the new unbundled moderate sedation codes was sizable and heterogeneous, highlighting the need for consistent and accurate reporting of moderate sedation. Total collections vary by case mix, patient insurance mix, and negotiated reimbursement rates.

Billing, Coding, and Credentialing for Interventional Radiology-Operated Endoscopy.

A sound understanding of billing and coding is essential to start a successful interventional radiology endoscopy practice. While the codes utilized are similar to gastrointestinal and genitourinary endoscopy codes, physicians and institutional coders need to be familiar with the codes used for these types of procedures in the interventional radiology setting. The following manuscript gives a brief overview of aspects relating to credentialing, billing, and coding in interventional radiology endoscopy.

Proposed standards for reporting outcomes of treating biliary injuries.

BACKGROUND: There is no standard nor widely accepted way of reporting outcomes of treatment of biliary injuries. This hinders comparison of results among approaches and among centers. This paper presents a proposal to standardize terminology and reporting of results of treating biliary injuries. METHODS: The proposal was developed by an international group of surgeons, biliary endoscopists and interventional radiologists. The method is based on the concept of "patency" and is similar to the approach used to create reporting standards for arteriovenous hemodialysis access. RESULTS: The group considered definitions and gradings under the following headings: Definition of Patency, Definition of Index Treatment Periods, Grading of Severity of Biliary Injury, Grading of Patency, Metrics, Comparison of Surgical to Non Surgical Treatments and Presentation of Case Series. CONCLUSIONS: A standard procedure for reporting outcomes of treating biliary injuries has been produced. It is applicable to presenting results of treatment by surgery, endoscopy, and interventional radiology.

Patient radiation doses during invasive cardiac procedures categorised by clinical code.

Patient radiation doses delivered during invasive fluoroscopic cardiology procedures at the University Hospital of North Staffordshire during a 3 year period from November 1999 to August 2002, and comprising 6189 patient records, have been analysed. Cases have been stratified using classification codes from the Office of Population Census and Surveys (OPCS-4 codes), allowing representative doses to be assessed for 34 distinct types of cardiac radiological procedure. In addition, local guidance levels have been derived for the eight most common procedures. This work represents one of the largest and most detailed published studies of patient radiation dose during cardiac procedures, and should assist in meeting the IR(ME)R regulations requirement for establishment of diagnostic reference levels, and in enabling dose optimization of individual exposures.