On April 1, 2024, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) finalized their Calendar Year (CY) 2025 rates for Medicare Advantage (“MA”) and Part D prescription drug programs. With the conversion to version 28 from version 24, along with the statement that payments from the government to MA plans will “increase” by an average of 3.70% ($16 billion) over 2024 / 2025 years, what does this mean for value-based care in general?

With the federal government expecting to pay between $500-$600 billion dollars in MA payments to private health plans in CY 2025, it appears that Medicare Advantage is getting a “bump” in payments, but how did we get here? CMS considers numerous factors to calculate the growth rates, the largest being the quarter four fee-for-service data and calculates into the ratio the updated version 28 MA risk model.

With the release of the CY 2025 Advanced Notice, below is what we can expect moving forward into 2025:

 

Financial ImpactAdvanced Notice CY 2025Rate Announcement CY 2025
Effective Growth Rate2.44%2.33%
Rebasing / Re-PricingBased on geographical adjustment index which was not available during the release0.07%
Change in STAR Ratings-0.15%-0.11%
MA Coding Pattern Adjustment0%0%
Risk Model (v28) Revision and Fee-for-Service Normalization-2.45%-2.45%
MA risk score trend3.86%3.86%
Expected Average Change in Revenue+3.70%+3.70%

Reference: https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/fact-sheets/contract-year-2025-medicare-advantage-and-part-d-final-rule-cms-4205-f

As we can see from the financial impact of the risk model revisions and fee-for-service normalization, it appears that FFS plans are still outpacing MA plans with a reduction in the normalization rates. We must remember that beginning CY 2023 (with the October 1, 2022, updates), the HCC model significantly decreased the number of ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes that would allow for appropriate risk adjustment factor assignment. The update to v28 also constrained many of our coefficients. For the many who treat diabetic patients with complications, this significantly impacted their RAF scores. While CMS continues to phase in the updated risk adjustment model (proposed 67% of the risk score calculated on the updated 2024 model with 33% remaining calculated on the 2020 model), we are still looking at a significant decrease in shared savings for those that participate in some type of value-based care system. The MA risk score considers a “trend” in risk scores across plans and does not account for normalization or coding patterns adjusting to MA risk scores.

The 2020 and 2024 trend in CMS-HCC risk adjustment models used the CY 2024 phase-in of model 28 and blended this separately with the available 2020-2024 adjustment models. According to CMS, the risk score trend is 3.30% under the CY 2024 HCC model and 5.00% under the 2020 CMS-HCC model. CMS then takes these years and the models and “blends” the scores, which is where we land at the phase-in of 67% of MA risk score under 2024 and 33% under the 2020 models. Based on the calculations, it appears that the MA risk score trend for CY 2025 will increase to 3.86%.

Another impactful change was the MA Risk Adjustment Data Validation (RADV) Appeals Process. The final rule revised the process where MA sponsors cannot request a medical record review determination and a payment error calculation appeal at the same time. This means that MAOs must request a medical record determination through the RADV process. There is also a new requirement that if the CMS Administrator does not elect to review the medical records within ninety (90) days, the hearing officer’s decision becomes final. This means if we receive a notification by RADV, it is imperative we take heed and ensure our medical records are reviewed on time.

 The Medicare Part D (Pharmacy) Medication Therapy Management Program (MTM) finalized targeting drugs that would provide more consistent, equitable, and expanded coverage under these services. There were three (3) separate decisions that came out of the Final Rule:

  1. To add HIV / AIDS to the list of core chronic diseases. This will require sponsors to include all ten (10) core chronic diseases previously identified by CMS within the target criteria.
  2. All plan sponsors are required to include all Part D maintenance drugs and continue retaining all flexibility for Part D drugs within the targeted criteria.
  3. CMS revised the MTM cost threshold to be the same and / or similar to the average annual cost of eight (8) generic drugs under the MTM program. Unfortunately, CMS did not finalize the proposed plan to reduce the maximum number of drugs the plan sponsor can require. CMS did set the annual cost of the drugs at $1,623.00 for CY 2025.

With all of the changes culminating in CY 2025, especially with the new calculation of v28 being sixty-seven percent (67%) of our risk score calculations, staying up to date is imperative. The changes could not only affect quality, risk, and compliance but could also affect your shared-savings and Accountable Care Organizations. Please contact Amy C. Pritchett, AAPC Fellow, RAP, CRC, CPA-RA, CCS, CPMA, CPCO, CDEI, CDEO, CDEC, CANPC, CASCC, CMPM, AAPC Approved Instructor | Approved ICD-10-CM / PCS Trainer at APritchett@AskPHC.com for more information.

Recently, we have been getting questions about the new Healthcare Common Procedural Coding System (“HCPCS”) code G2211 (Visit complexity inherent to evaluation and management associated with medical care services that serve as the continuing focal point for all needed health care services and/or with medical care services that are part of ongoing care related to a patient’s single, serious condition or a complex condition).

This code went into effect for The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) on 1/1/2024.

As you can see from the description of the code, there is a lot to unpack here. In this article, we will address some of the questions we have received.

Question: Which providers can report code G2211?
Answer: This code may be billed by any provider who can bill the outpatient evaluation and management (“E/M”) codes 99202-99215, regardless of their specialty. This includes MDs, DOs, and NPPs, such as NPs and PAs.

Question: Can specialists use G2211 for consultations since Medicare does not pay for consult codes?
Answer: If the specialist is simply seeing the patient once to render an opinion, then G2211 would not be appropriate. If the specialist is going to manage a single serious or complex condition for the patient going forward, then you could report G2211 with your new patient office visit codes (99202-99205). When the patient returns to the office for you to manage that condition you could report established office visit code (99212-99215) with G2211.

Question: Since G2211 is an add-on code, what are the primary codes that must be reported with G2211?
Answer: You must report one of the codes ranging 99201-99215 with G2211. These are the only primary codes assigned to G2211.

Question: Can G2211 be billed for any place of service?
Answer: Only the following places of service codes are applicable for G2211: 02, 10, 11, 19, or 22.

Question: Can G2211 be billed as telehealth?
Answer: G2211 is on the 2024 telehealth list.

Question: Can I bill G2211 for audio only telehealth?
Answer: You cannot bill G2211 to Medicare for audio-only telehealth because the telephone visit codes (99441-99443) are not included in the primary codes that are required to bill G2211.

Question: What are the requirements that need to be documented to report code G2211?
Answer:
Currently, there are no guidelines for documenting code G2211. We recently attended a MAC webinar where the speaker indicated that Medicare would be looking at the patient’s entire record to see evidence of a longitudinal relationship with the patient over time. Their medical record should demonstrate that the provider serves as the continuing focal point for all needed health or medical care services that are part of ongoing care related to a patient’s single, serious condition or a complex condition. We do not recommend providers use a templated statement to attempt to support G2211. Best practice would be to record the relationship with the patient in the documentation for each visit.

Question: How often can I report code G2211?
Answer: As of 2024, there are no frequency limitations on code G2211.

Question: Are there additional costs to the patient for code G2211?
Answer: Code G2211 is subject to Medicare cost sharing (coinsurance and deductible). See example below:

CPT Codes2024 National Non-Facility RateCost share (20%)
99214$128.16$25.63
G2211$16.31$3.26
Totals$144.47$28.89

We estimate the cost to the patient for a moderate level office visit with G2211. Also, we recommend that you advise your patients in advance that you will be billing G2211, and that cost sharing applies.

Question: If I perform an in-office procedure with an E/M plus modifier 25, can I also report G2211?
Answer: There are edits in place that will deny G2211 when billed with an E/M code that has modifier 25 appended to it.

Keeping up with the nuances of HCPCS coding is exhausting. Pinnacle Enterprise Risk Consulting Services (“PERCS”) is here to help you navigate guidelines and remain compliant. If you have any questions or need assistance, please contact Alysia Delozier, CPC, CPMA, Sr. Physician Auditor and Educator at ADelozier@AskPHC.com, Angie Wood, CPC, Sr. Physician Auditor and Educator at AWood@AskPHC.com or Lori Carlin, CPC, COC, CPCO, CCS, CRC, Principal at LCarlin@AskPHC.com. They will be readily available to answer your questions and provide expert advice, so you are well equipped to move forward!

References:

https://www.cms.gov/files/document/r12461cp.pdf

Every primary care physician (PCP) in the United States should be integrated into an accountable care model. The primary objective of accountable care models is to provide all participating healthcare providers with the necessary incentives and resources to deliver top-notch, coordinated, team-based care that prioritizes health promotion. By doing so, it aims to minimize fragmentation and reduce costs for individuals and the healthcare system as a whole.

The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMS Innovation Center or “Innovation Center”) is embarking on an ambitious new strategy aimed at achieving fair outcomes through the provision of high-quality, cost-effective, person-centered care. One of its primary objectives is to ensure that by 2030, all Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in Parts A and B will be involved in a care framework that holds providers accountable for both quality and the overall cost of care.

The healthcare landscape in the United States is on the cusp of a transformative change with the introduction of the Accountable Care Organization Primary Care Flexibility (ACO PC Flex) Model. This initiative, under the auspices of CMS’s Medicare Shared Savings Program, represents a strategic move towards bolstering primary care and advancing health equity through innovative payment models. Here, we delve into the features of the ACO PC Flex Model and its potential impact on the future of healthcare.

 

Transforming Care Delivery – A New CMS Program

The ACO PC Flex Model is a visionary approach aimed at revolutionizing primary care delivery by transitioning from traditional fee-for-service payments to more dynamic and supportive financial structures. This model provides a two-pronged financial incentive: the Prospective Primary Care Payment (PPCP) and a one-time Advanced Shared Savings Payment. These are designed to ensure a steady funding stream that supports proactive, team-based, and person-centered care, essential for improving health outcomes and enhancing care quality.

 

Innovative Payment Structures – Primary Care Payments in Advance

At the heart of the ACO PC Flex Model is the PPCP, a novel payment mechanism that includes a County Base Rate along with an Enhanced Amount for delivering enhanced primary care services. This prospective payment system allows ACOs to plan and execute more effective and efficient care strategies, tailored to the needs of their specific patient populations. Moreover, the one-time Advanced Shared Savings Payment helps new and renewing ACOs cover setup or operational costs, encouraging the formation and sustainability of ACOs within the Shared Savings Program.

 

Advancing Health Equity

A central aim of the ACO PC Flex Model is to address and reduce healthcare disparities through enhanced primary care services. By facilitating a flexible payment approach and targeting safety net providers, the model seeks to channel resources more effectively to underserved populations, thereby improving overall health equity.

 

Looking Forward

Set to commence on January 1, 2025, the ACO PC Flex Model marks a significant stride towards reshaping Medicare and redefining primary care in America. By fostering stronger accountable care relationships and prioritizing funding for primary care, this model not only aims to enhance the efficiency of healthcare delivery but also to ensure that care is more inclusive, equitable, and patient-centered.

With these Advance Primary Care funds, we also encourage PCPs to think of outside-the-box approaches to bolster relationships and partnerships with specialists and facilities throughout the healthcare spectrum. The objective is to facilitate collaboration across all healthcare sectors, ensuring the delivery of appropriate care to the right patient at the right time.

As we anticipate the rollout of this model, the healthcare sector is poised to witness a paradigm shift that could set a new standard for how primary care is funded, delivered, and managed in the Medicare ecosystem. This ambitious initiative represents a pivotal step in the journey towards a more sustainable and equitable healthcare system, underscoring CMS’s commitment to improving the health landscape across the nation.

 

Next Steps – How Can You Participate?

To be eligible for the Flex Model, low-revenue ACOs (defined under 42 CFR § 425.20) and those serving rural or underserved areas with an emphasis on enhancing healthcare access, outcomes, and engagement must apply to join the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP). New or renewing ACOs must express their interest in participating in Phase 1 of the application process for the agreement period starting January 1, 2025.

The application process for the MSSP is divided into two phases. Phase 1 begins on May 20, 2024, and ends on June 17, 2024. During this initial phase, ACOs submit preliminary information. They will then provide additional details in Phase 2, which is set to open on October 18, 2024, and conclude on October 29, 2024.

 

Want CMS to cover start up and infrastructure costs? Let Pinnacle help you with your Primary Care Flex Model supplemental application.

Some important dates to always keep in mind:

  • May 20: ACO Application Begins – Make sure you start working on registering on the ACO Management System Portal to begin your application!
  • August 1: This is the final opportunity to add ACO participants and/or SNF affiliate TINs.
  • September 5: This is the final opportunity to withdraw ACO participants and/or SNF affiliate TINs.

 

Let us help you navigate the ACO application process and VBC strategy along with policy changes. For more information, please contact:

  • Kelly Conroy at 561-385-7566 or KConroy@AskPHC.com, or
  • Daniela Yusufbekova, MHA, PMP at 561-445-8303 or DYusufbekova@AskPHC.com, or
  • Zach Maher, MBA at 720-432-6422 or ZMaher@AskPHC.com.

Additional Resources:

If you have questions about how to properly bill Medicare for bilateral procedures, the National Correct Coding Initiative (“NCCI”) policy manual has your answers. Starting on page 30 of chapter 1 of the 2024 NCCI manual, they give detailed instructions.

 

Step one – Look your code up in the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule Database (“MPFSDB”). Don’t know where to find the MPFSDB? No worries, we have you covered. The most direct way is to go to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ (“CMS”) website and use their Fee Schedule Tool which is included the references section below. Follow these steps to pull up your fee:

    1. Click on the button that reads “begin search.”
    2. Click “accept” on the CMS disclaimer.
    3. Select the year for your date of service.
    4. Select “payment policy indicators” for type of information.
    5. Select single HCPCs code for HCPCs criteria.
    6. Enter your HCPCs code.
    7. Select all for modifiers.
    8. Then hit the search fees button.

 

Step two – Once you get your search results for your code, look at the BILT SURG column to see what the bilateral indicator is.

  • Bilateral indicator of “0” – Only “1” unit can be billed regardless of whether the procedure is performed bilaterally or unilaterally. Procedure code should not be reported with a 50 or RT/LT modifier.
    Code 71045 (X-ray exam chest 1 view) has a bilateral indicator of “0.” Report on one line with one unit. Do not append modifiers 50, RT or LT.
  • Bilateral indicator of “1” – Billing depends on whether it is a surgical or diagnostic procedure.
    • For surgical procedures – report 1 unit with modifier 50.
      Code 20610 (Drain/inj joint/bursa w/o us) has a bilateral indicator of “1.” Report on one line as 20610-50 x 1 unit.
    • For diagnostic procedures – You have two options. You can either report 1 unit with modifier 50 or you can report on two lines with 1 unit on each line. Append modifier RT on the first line and modifier LT on the second line.
  • Bilateral indicator of “2” – Report on one line with one unit, but the procedure will be priced as bilateral.
    Code 31231 (Nasal endoscopy, diagnostic, unilateral or bilateral) has a bilateral indicator of 2. If performed bilaterally you would report 31231 with 1 unit and no modifier. The payment of the code is set as though the procedure is bilateral.
  • Bilateral indicator of “3” – Billing will depend on whether it is a surgical or diagnostic procedure.
    • For surgical procedures – report 1 unit with modifier 50.
    • For diagnostic procedures – You have three options.
      1. You can report with 2 units on one claim line – for example: 70030 x 2 units.
      2. You can report with 1 unit on one claim line with modifier 50 – for example: 70030-50 x 1 unit.
      3. You can report on 2 claims lines with one unit each with modifier RT on the first line and modifier LT on the second line. As in these two examples:
        70030- RT x 1 unit (first line)
        70030-LT x 1 unit (second line)
  • Bilateral indicator of “9” – Concept does not apply.

 

Because MAC guidelines may vary, always check with your MAC for their specific rules.

 

Keeping up with the nuances of NCCI edits can be exhausting. PERCS is here to help you to remain compliant. If you have any questions or need assistance, please contact Angie Wood, CPC, Sr. Physician Auditor and Educator at AWood@AskPHC.com or Lori Carlin, CPC, COC, CPCO, CCS, CRC, Principal, at LCarlin@AskPHC.com. They will be readily available to answer your questions and provide expert advice, so you are well equipped to move forward!

 

References:

https://www.cms.gov/medicare/coding-billing/national-correct-coding-initiative-ncci-edits/medicare-ncci-policy-manual

Fee Schedule Look Up Tool: https://www.cms.gov/medicare/physician-fee-schedule/search/overview

In this series of articles on the National Correct Coding Initiative (“NCCI”) Policy Manual, we have discussed procedure to procedure (“PTP”) edits and medically unlikely edits (“MUE”), but were you aware that NCCI also has add-on code (“AOC”) edits?

Add-on codes are codes that should not be reported alone. They will always be billed as an “add on” to a primary code. The Current Procedural Terminology (“CPT”) manual will indicate add-on codes with a “+” sign.  They may also give a list of primary codes that the add-on code can be reported in addition to.

Most add-on codes are not included in NCCI’s PTP edits because their primary codes would be listed instead.  However, CMS does have add-on code edits they publish which are updated quarterly and can be downloaded using the link provided in the references below.

There are three types of add-on code edits:

  1. Type 1 – These add-on codes will follow CPT/HCPC’s acceptable primary codes. Medicare administrative contractors (“MAC”) should not allow any other primary codes. An example of this is 99292 (Critical care, evaluation, and management of the critically ill or critically injured patient; each additional 30 minutes).  In the CPT manual, only 99291 is listed as a viable primary code.
  1. Type 2 – For these add-on codes, CPT/HCPCs have not designated specific primary codes. MACs are permitted to determine whether these codes can be primary codes. An example of this is code 38747 (Abdominal lymphadenectomy, regional, including celiac, gastric, portal, peripancreatic, with or without para-aortic and vena caval nodes).  CPT does not specify a list of primary codes that must be billed with 38747. Therefore, your MAC gets to decide whether they will pay a certain primary code with this add-on code. This may require you to submit documentation to support both codes.
  1. Type 3 – For these add-on codes, CPT/HCPCs have = designated some but not all the possible primary codes. Medicare contractors should allow the CPT/HCPC’s designated primary codes but also create their own list of other acceptable primary codes. An example of this is code 20701 (Removal of drug-delivery device(s), deep). Your MAC would allow the primary codes listed in the CPT manual but would also have a list of their own acceptable primary codes.

As you can see, understanding the type of AOC edit is crucial to determining how to properly code add-on services and how to respond to add-on code denials.

Keeping up with the nuances of NCCI edits can be exhausting.  PERCS is here to help you to remain compliant.  If you have any questions or need assistance, please contact Angie Wood, CPC, Sr. Physician Auditor and Educator at AWood@AskPHC.com or Lori Carlin, CPC, COC, CPCO, CCS, CRC, Principal, at LCarlin@AskPHC.com . They will be readily available to answer your questions and provide expert advice, so you are well equipped to move forward!

References:

https://www.cms.gov/medicare/coding-billing/national-correct-coding-initiative-ncci-edits/medicare-ncci-policy-manual

https://www.cms.gov/ncci-medicare/medicare-ncci-add-code-edits

Introduction & Background

 

Following the enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) in March 2010, the healthcare industry has experienced a major shift in its reimbursement and payment structure. While the United States healthcare system had historically operated under a fee-for-service (FFS) model, the PPACA initiated a notable shift to value-based care (VBC). Under the traditional FFS model, providers are paid separately for each medical service. Because of this structure, the FFS model has been characterized as a ‘volume-based’ payment model, under which healthcare expenditures notably increased. Many argue that this outcome was inevitable given that the FFS model incentivizes physicians to provide more treatments. In this way, industry experts characterize the FFS model as dependent on the quantity – rather than the quality – of care.

On the other hand, a VBC model delivers healthcare through a structure that pays providers based on the quality of services rendered. These providers – whether physicians, hospitals, labs, advanced practice providers (APPs), or other – are therefore reimbursed based on the health outcomes of their patients rather than on the volume of services rendered. According to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), VBC can be described as “designing care so that it focuses on quality, provider performance and the patient experience.”[1] Several different models have been developed to deliver VBC, including accountable care organizations (ACOs), alternative payment models (APMs), care coordination, and integrated care, among others. As this area of healthcare delivery continues to evolve, additional models continue to develop – one of which is known as the AHEAD model.

The AHEAD model – which stands for All-Payer Health Equity Approaches and Development (AHEAD) – is a voluntary, state total cost of care (TCOC) model. According to CMS, TCOC is defined as “the process of holding participating states accountable for quality and population health outcomes, while constraining costs of healthcare services delivered in a state or specified sub-state region.”[2] As applied by CMS, this process occurs across all payers, including Medicare, Medicaid, and private health insurers. Put simply, TCOC represents total spending on healthcare. The AHEAD Model aims to reduce these healthcare costs while also improving health outcomes. Outlined in the following sections are notable components of the AHEAD Model, key considerations, and how VBC experts can help.

 

Model Overview

 

The AHEAD Model, which is anticipated to operate from 2024 through 2034, provides an opportunity for states to take accountability for population health, health equity improvements, and FFS TCOC. Under the Model – which expects to improve health outcomes and quality – states will collaborate with hospital and primary care providers (PCPs) to “redesign care delivery to focus on keeping people healthy and out of the hospital.”[3]

According to CMS, its stated objective with the AHEAD Model is to:

  • Collaborate with states to curb healthcare cost growth;
  • Improve population health; and,
  • Advance health equity by reducing disparity in health outcomes.[4]

In accordance with this objective, CMS will support states participating in the AHEAD Model through:

  • Increasing investment in primary care;
  • Providing stability for hospitals; and,
  • Supporting beneficiary connection to community resources.[5]

Under the AHEAD Model’s TCOC approach, participating states will assume responsibility for managing healthcare quality and cost across payers. CMS indicates that the primary goal of the AHEAD Model is “improving healthcare outcomes and health equity for all residents within a participating state or region.”[6]

While it builds on the work of existing state-based models, CMS reports that the AHEAD model is different because it will implement the AHEAD Model concurrently across multiple states. CMS anticipates that the AHEAD Model will enable participating states to increase investment in primary care while also constraining TCOC growth. Overall, CMS wishes for the AHEAD Model to encourage a “state-level, multi-sector approach to care, advancing health equity and thereby improving population health outcomes, and coordinating resources to address underlying factors that contribute to disparities in health outcomes in underserved communities.”[7] In effect, the AHEAD Model will test state accountability for controlling overall growth in healthcare expenditures – while increasing investment in primary care and improving population health outcomes within a participating state or state region.

Application Process

States that wish to participate in the AHEAD Model can take part in the application process which begins in Spring 2024. Applicants must apply to the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) which was released in late 2023. According to CMS, it expects to award cooperative agreements to up to eight states across two application periods. For those states applying to participate in the AHEAD Model, they must select one of three cohorts depending on their level of readiness for implementation. These three cohorts and the associated key considerations for each are as follows:

  • Cohort 1:
    • Pre-Implementation Period – 18 months, tentatively July 2024 – December 2025
    • Readiness – State is ready to apply and implement the AHEAD Model as soon as possible
    • Performance Years – Will tentatively begin January 2026, with a total of nine performance years
  • Cohort 2:
    • Pre-Implementation Period – 30 months, tentatively July 2024 – December 2026
    • Readiness – State is ready to apply to the AHEAD Model but requires additional time to prepare for implementation (e.g., developing Medicaid components, recruiting healthcare providers for participation, developing data infrastructure, etc.)
    • Performance Years – Will tentatively begin January 2027, with a total of eight performance years
  • Cohort 3:
    • Pre-Implementation Period – 24 months, tentatively January 2025 – December 2026
    • Readiness – State needs additional time to apply
    • Performance Years – Will tentatively begin January 2027, with a total of eight performance years[8]

While the AHEAD Model plans to function for 11 years (i.e., 2024 through 2034), CMS will provide funding to chosen states for up to six years in support of participation. Specifically, CMS plan to award each participating state a maximum of $12 million with performance periods beginning in either January 2026 or January 2027, depending on cohort. According to CMS, it is testing the AHEAD Model over a longer period (to end in December 2034) to allow appropriate time for primary care investment and enhanced care coordination with a goal of resultant improved health with less spending.

Requirements & Participation Targets

The AHEAD Model’s general objective is to improve health outcomes across multiple states. Key strategies to achieve this objective include:

  • An All-Payer Approach;
  • Medicaid Alignment;
  • Behavioral Health Integration;
  • Equity Integrated Across the Model; and,
  • Accelerating Existing State Innovations.[9]

The financial support provided by CMS for the selected states will be provided via Cooperative Agreement (CoAg) Funding. This funding, along with primary care AHEAD initiatives and hospital global budgets (HGBs – wherein hospitals receive a pre-determined, fixed annual budget), comprise the key components of the AHEAD Model. In order to be eligible for AHEAD Model participation, applicants must have “at least 10,000 resident beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare Parts A and B residing in the applicant state or sub-state region.”[10] Eligible AHEAD Model applicants must have the authority to accept the CoAg Funding (e.g., state Medicaid agency, state public health agency, state insurance agency). CoAg awards differ from grants in that CoAg funding has a substantial degree of federal involvement in carrying out the funded activity (i.e., as opposed to the type of administrative requirements imposed). With regard to the AHEAD Model, the NOFO stated specific parameters around the manner in which the CoAg funding can be used. The funding is generally intended to support model planning and implementation activities, including:

  • Recruiting primary care providers and hospitals to participate in the model;
  • Setting statewide TCOC cost growth targets and primary care investment targets;
  • Building behavioral health infrastructure and capacity;
  • Supporting Medicaid and commercial payer alignment;
  • Hiring new staff to support the model;
  • Investing in new technology;
  • Supporting demographic data collection; and,
  • Developing Medicaid HGB methodology.[11]

While the above list is not an exhaustive description of CoAg fund usage, it provides examples that aim to promote appropriate planning and implementation of the AHEAD Model. If successful, applicants will receive a Notice of Award (NoA) which authorizes the CoAg.

For those states selected, operational milestones that must be met prior to certain performance years (PY) as part of the CoAg include:

  • State Agreement Negotiation and Signature by State Leadership and CMS
    • Execution of State Agreement – 6 months prior to PY1
  • Creation and Implementation of All-Payer TCOC and Primary Care Investment Targets
    • Creation of Targets – 90 days before PY1
    • Finalization of Targets – 90 days before PY2
  • Successful Recruitment of Hospitals to Participate in Medicare FFS HGBs
    • Hospitals Agree to Participate – 10% of Medicare FFS Net Patient Revenue (“NPR”) Would be Under Medicare FFS HGBs by PY1
    • Hospitals Agree to Participate – 30% of Medicare FFS NPR in an HGB for PY3 for each subsequent PY

 

  • Implementation of Medicaid Primary Care APM
    • Implementation of Medicaid Primary Care APM with Participation from Primary Care Practices by the beginning of PY1
  • Implementation of Medicaid HGBs
    • Implementation of Medicaid HGB by the end of PY1
  • Commercial Payer Alignment with HGBs
    • At Least One Commercial Payer Participating in HGBs by the start of PY2

While these milestones will be included in the CoAg, precise dates will be dependent on the NOFO for which a state is applying.

Additional Detail & Notable Issues

 

While the AHEAD Model and its requirements are numerous, several key considerations are worth noting. As such, we have outlined below additional detail and notable topics to provide as much information as possible.[12] While additional relevant information on each of the below subjects is available, outlined below are an overview of each.

  • Implementation Context – the AHEAD Model can be implemented both for managed care and FFS Medicaid populations.
  • Data Collection and Sharing – participating states must collect and report statewide quality, health equity, and all-payor TCOC and primary care investment performance data.
  • Establishment of Quality Measures – participating states will select a set of quality and population health measures from a menu of options provided by CMS. States will set specific targets for each selected measure (subject to CMS approval).
  • Individual Beneficiary Experience – at the provider level, hospitals will use the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey, which assesses an individual’s care experience.
  • State Performance Assessment – CMS will assess state performance on generated savings relative to the state’s projected TCOC growth absent the model. Each participating state will be responsible for certain growth and investment targets.
  • Health Equity – participating hospitals and primary care practices will be required to collect demographic and social needs data which will be used to identify health disparities and measure progress toward improvement. HGBs will be adjusted based on improvements in equity of health outcomes and quality of care.
  • Behavioral Health – participating primary care practices will be required to engage in behavioral health integration activities as a component of Primary Care AHEAD care transformation requirements.
  • State Funding Sustainability – interested states should develop a detailed sustainability plan; and, CMS recommends that states consider strategies to sustain funding and AHEAD Model activities throughout the implementation period.
  • Simultaneous Participation – CMS models and programs that can concurrently operate within an AHEAD state or sub-state region (which certain conditions and restrictions) include:
    • ACO Realizing Equity, Access, and Community Health (ACO REACH)
    • Cell and Gene Therapy (CGT) Access
    • Guiding an Improved Demetia Experience (GUIDE)
    • Innovation in Behavioral Health (IBH)
    • Medicare Shared Savings Program
    • Primary Care First

Models that cannot concurrently operate within overlapping geographic regions include:

  • Making Care Primary (i.e., MCP)
  • Transforming Maternal Health (TMaH)
  • Hospital and Health System Participation – during the NOFO period, hospitals and health systems can consult with applicable state agencies to inform of their intent to participate in the AHEAD Model. During the AHEAD Model, they can participate in HGBs as a mechanism to improve care delivery and population health.
  • Benefits for Participating Hospitals – Participating hospitals will benefit from (i) stable funding through HGBs, (ii) technical assistance and learning activities, (iii) use of benefit enhancements to support care redesign efforts, and (iv) potential realized savings from reductions in avoidable utilization and increased delivery efficiency.
  • Development and Use of HGBs – the AHEAD Model will implement Medicare FFS and Medicaid HGBs, while encouraging increased commercial payer alignment. States will be required to develop a Medicaid HGB methodology, subject to CMS approval. These HGBs must be implemented in PY1, after the pre-implementation period.
  • Reduction in Financial Risk for Participating Hospitals – CMS (i) will provide voluntary participation hospitals with upfront financial investments, (ii) has designed the Medicare FFS HGB methodology to incentivize early participation in the model, and (iii) may approve additional Medicaid flexibilities to reduce untended risk to participating hospitals.
  • Complete and Quality Care Under HGBs – The purpose of state and hospital accountability for TCOC growth, quality, and population health outcomes under the AHEAD Model is meant to ensure patients benefit from enhanced quality and access (i.e., not reduced care). HGBs incentivize: (i) keeping patients healthy and out of the hospital, (ii) reducing complications during hospitalization, and (iii) better care coordination to prevent readmissions. HGBs will be adjusted over time to account for factors such as changes in the patient population, services provided, and performance in quality, health equity, TCOC, and other metrics.
  • TCOC Accountability – the TCOC targets will be negotiated between CMS and each participating state (or state region) during the pre-implementation period. Hospitals voluntarily participating in Medicare FFS global budgets are accountable for Medicare FFS TCOC for patients residing in their service area through a performance adjustment to the global budget. Hospital accountability for TCOC performance will be phased in over the course of the model, starting with upside-only risk for participating hospitals.
  • Primary Care Strategies – the AHEAD model incorporates lessons learned from existing state-based models and its framework will allow states to leverage existing state innovations while testing a suite of new interventions across all states. The AHEAD Model differs from previous models in three specific ways:
    • It establishes a specific goal of increasing statewide primary care investment in proportion to the TCOC;
    • It pairs HGBs with advanced primary care; and,
    • It offers a flexible framework to implement advanced primary care alignment with the state’s existing Medicaid primary care program activities.
  • Primary Care Practice Participation – primary care practices with an interest in participating in the AHEAD Model can consult with the applicable state agency eligible to apply. To be eligible for participation in Primary Care AHEAD, practices must participate simultaneously in the state Medicaid advanced primary care program or Primary Care Medical Home (PCMH).
  • Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) Participation – FQHCs are eligible to participate in Primary Care AHEAD and will do so in the same way as non-safety net primary care practices.
  • Benefits of Primary Care Participation – participating primary care practices will receive flexible, prospective, and enhanced payments which are meant to increase capacity for delivering advanced primary care services for attributed Medicare Part B patients.
  • Required Criteria for Medicaid Primary Care APM or PCMH – each applicant’s Medicaid primary care APM or PCMH program should focus on enhanced care coordination services, including behavioral health integration and health-related social needs interventions.

 

Key Takeaways

 

CMS’ AHEAD Model, a TCOC model for states that will operate for 11 years, aims to achieve strategic goals that include improving population health, curtailing growth in healthcare costs, and furthering health equity. The AHEAD Model leverages existing state models and will be implemented via three cohorts, each with applicable requirements and time periods. While it requires certain infrastructure enhancements, the model provides upfront investments, resources, and tools to aid in success. Like other VBC models, the AHEAD Model aims to transition from traditional FFS payments to value-based payment structures with measurable results. These intended consequences include improved patient outcomes, lessened costs, and increased health equity. While the model includes planning and reporting requirements, incentives for participation and the opportunity to improve healthcare delivery are numerous.

The AHEAD Model represents a simultaneous effort across multiple states and extends beyond Medicare to encompass a multi-payer approach. This type of alignment across multiple payers represents a key component in promoting comprehensive, high-quality primary care across diverse patient populations and serves to manage costs, hospitalization rates, and aggregate patient outcomes. As applicable states begin to move through the pre-implementation process, additional investment and resources will be required.

Should you have any questions regarding the AHEAD Model or other VBC opportunities, please reach out to Principal Kelly Conroy at KConroy@AskPHC.com.

[1] As reported at https://www.cms.gov/priorities/innovation/key-concepts/value-based-care.

[2] As reported at https://www.cms.gov/priorities/innovation/key-concepts/total-cost-of-care-and-hospital-global-budgets.

[3] As reported at https://www.cms.gov/files/document/ahead-infographic.pdf

[4] As reported as https://www.cms.gov/priorities/innovation/innovation-models/ahead.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] As reported at https://www.cms.gov/files/document/ahead-model-nofo-webinar-slides.pdf

[10] Ibid. CMS further notes that states participating in Making Care Primary (MCP) statewide may not participate in the AHEAD Model. If MCP operates only in a sub-state region of a state, the state may apply to participate in a different sub-state region, as long as there is no geographic overlap.

[11] As reported at https://www.cms.gov/files/document/ahead-model-nofo-webinar-slides.pdf

[12] As reported at https://www.cms.gov/priorities/innovation/ahead/faqs.

In part one we discussed procedure to procedure (“PTP”) edits. In this article we will discuss Medically Unlikely Edits (“MUEs”).

 

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) defines an MUE as “the maximum units of service reported for a HCPCS/CPT code on the vast majority of appropriately reported claims by the same provider/supplier for the same beneficiary on the same date of service.”

 

There are two types of MUEs, Claim line MUEs and date of service MUEs. This may just sound like semantics, but it really matters.

 

A claim line MUE is adjudicated based on the units billed on the line item of the claim. The Medicare Administrative Contractor (“MAC”) is specifically looking to see how many units were billed for that CPT or HCPCS code on that particular line item. In contrast, date of service (“DOS”) MUEs are adjudicated based on how many units of a given CPT or HCPCS code are billed by the same provider to the same patient on the same day. This means they will look at data across all claims billed by that provider for that patient on that DOS. They will sum up the units for that specific CPT or HCPCS code and then compare it to the MUE.

 

CMS updates all NCCI edits (including MUEs) once a quarter. We have provided a link below so you can download the file from the CMS website. You can use this file to determine what type of MUE edit your code has and what the maximum units are.

 

You will want to become familiar with the MUE Adjudication Indicators (“MAIs”) to properly utilize the MUE files.

 

MAIDescriptionRecourse
1This is a line item edit.If documentation supports the units you have billed, you can use modifiers like 59 or anatomical modifiers on separate lines of the claim to get your units paid.
2Absolute date of service edit.No real recourse. MACs are restricted from overriding these edits during processing, reopening or redetermination.
3Per day edit based clinical benchmarks.If your documentation supports the units billed, the MAC can bypass the MUE during processing, reopening or higher-level appeal.

 

Let’s walk through a few examples.

 

Code 44950 Appendectomy has an MAI of 2 and an MUE of 1. This indicates the MUE for 44950 is an absolute per day MUE. We can only bill 1 unit of 44950. The MAC will look across all claims for this patient by the provider on this DOS and if they see more than one unit of 44950 billed, they will deny any units over 1. You cannot appeal to the MAC to review this because CMS does not allow them to pay more than 1 unit period. The MUE for 44950 is based on anatomical consideration since there is only one appendix.

 

Now, let’s look at a code that has an MAI of 3. CPT code 71045 Radiologic examination, chest; single view has an MAI of 3 and an MUE of 4. This means only 4 units of 71045 can be billed per date of service, per provider for a patient. However, if the clinical documentation supported medical necessity for 5 units, you could appeal to your MAC to review the initial determination and override the edit.

 

The NCCI manual has a lot of great information on how to properly bill units which should encourage you to keep up with all the updates. It also details how to properly report bilateral procedures. Be on the lookout for our next article where we will discuss this in detail.

 

Keeping up with all the nuances of NCCI edits can be exhausting. PERCS is here to help you remain compliant. If you have any questions or need assistance, please contact Angie Wood, CPC, Sr. Physician Auditor and Educator at AWood@AskPHC.com or Lori Carlin, CPC, COC, CPCO, CCS, CRC, Principal, at LCarlin@AskPHC.com. They will be readily available to answer your questions and provide expert advice, so you are well equipped to move forward!

 

References:

https://www.cms.gov/medicare/coding-billing/national-correct-coding-initiative-ncci-edits/medicare-ncci-policy-manual

https://www.cms.gov/medicare/coding-billing/national-correct-coding-initiative-ncci-edits/medicare-ncci-medically-unlikely-edits

Introduction

March is Kidney Awareness Month, and Pinnacle wants to share updates regarding the new conversion from v24 to v28.  What better way to celebrate than to brush up on how kidney and underlying kidney related diseases affect Risk Adjustment!? As we move forward over the next three-year implementation, it is important to understand how this new model will affect everything we know about Medicare Advantage and Risk Adjustment.

Chronic kidney disease (“CKD”), also known as chronic kidney failure, is a condition in which kidney function gradually declines. In its early stages, symptoms may not be recognized, due to the low impact of the disease. However, as the disease progresses it can lead to End Stage Renal Disease (“ESRD”), which is fatal without hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, or a kidney transplant.

Below are the five (5) Hierarchical Condition Categories (“HCCs”) diagnosis codes from v24 that directly correspond to a patient’s renal status:

  • HCC 134 – Dependence on Renal Dialysis
  • HCC 135 – Acute Renal Failure
  • HCC 136 – Chronic Kidney Disease, (Stage 5 or ESRD)
  • HCC 137 – Chronic Kidney Disease, Severe (Stage 4)
  • HCC 138 – Chronic Kidney Disease, Moderate (Stage 3)

Did you know there are also several additional underlying conditions that involve the renal system which can also lead to an HCC risk adjustment factor (RAF)?

  • HCC 23 – Secondary hyperparathyroidism of renal origin
  • HCC 18 – Diabetes Mellitus with kidney complications
  • HCC 107 – Ischemia and infarction of kidney

 

Documentation & Coding

Now that we’ve reviewed several kidney conditions and their HCC categories, let’s discuss how code assignment and documentation errors can affect risk adjustment payments. CKD is one of the most improperly documented and assigned diagnosis codes. Unfortunately, common errors typically revolve around diagnosis acuity and specificity! The ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting can be “due to” hypertension and diabetes; even when the provider does not link them.  This guideline is appropriate, unless the provider specifically links the CKD to another condition.  The guidelines also indicate to report an additional code for the stage of CKD, which is a requirement.  One must also remember CKD cannot be reported from diagnostic reports (e.g., laboratory results).  The provider must enter a status and / or plan into the progress note, assess the current stage of CKD, and document any pertinent findings in the progress note as well. The provider should always document to the highest specificity of the disease.

The medical record should include whether the CKD is an acute and / or chronic condition.  The CKD stage should be reported by the provider along with a review of most recent eGFR values to avoid the provider listing multiple stages of the CKD within the progress note.  The provider must “link” any underlying etiologies or manifestations to the CKD and specify any validation complications arising from the condition. Lastly, as we all know, after the implementation of v28 many unspecified diagnosis codes are no longer payable under HCC reimbursement. Therefore, we should remember to avoid diagnosis codes such as N18.9 (chronic kidney disease, unspecified) and N28.9 (disorder of kidney and ureter, unspecified).

 

The ‘With, And, and Due To’ Conundrum

ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting provides us with the gift of Section A.15 – “With.”  This guideline states the coder should interpret the word “with” or “in” to mean “associated with” or “due to” when it appears in a code title, the Alphabetic Index, or instructional note in the Tabular List.  This guideline presumes a “causal relationship” between the two conditions linked by these terms. However, this guideline is confusing and often misinterpreted by HCC risk adjustment coders.  As the guideline mandates, “These conditions should be coded as related even in the absence of provider documentation explicitly linking them…”. Does this mean an HCC coder could allow diabetic chronic kidney disease “with” chronic kidney disease stage IV to be reported without supporting documentation?  The answer is NO.  Although we are gifted the ability to “presume” the linking relationship, to capture the HCC risk adjustment factor the guidelines for HCC coding and reporting must also be met.

There is a perfect example provided by AHA® Coding Clinic Hypertension, Diabetes Mellitus and CKD (2018 Vol. 5, No. 4.)

Question: Since ICD-10-CM presumes a relationship between both chronic kidney disease (CKD) and hypertension as well as diabetes mellitus and CKD, what are the appropriate code assignments when the provider documents type 2 diabetic mellitus with chronic kidney disease and the patient also has a diagnosis of hypertension?

Answer: Assign codes E11.22, Type 2 diabetes mellitus with diabetic chronic kidney disease, I12.9, Hypertensive chronic kidney disease with stage 1 through stage 4 chronic kidney disease, or unspecified chronic kidney disease, and N18.9, Chronic kidney disease, unspecified. The classification presumes a cause-and-effect relationship between both diabetes and CKD and hypertension and CKD. CKD is most likely related to both hypertension and diabetes when the patient has all three conditions. Both high blood sugar and high pressure in the blood vessels will cause the vessels to deteriorate, which can then damage the kidneys.

As of October 1, 2018, the ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting have been revised to read, “Assign codes from category I12, Hypertensive chronic kidney disease, when both hypertension and a condition classifiable to category N18, Chronic kidney disease (CKD), are present. CKD should not be coded as hypertensive if the provider indicates the CKD is not related to the hypertension.” (Emphasis made by article author)

 

The Conclusion

The Assessment and Plan (“A/P”) can be likened to the conclusion of an essay.  It brings the documentation to a close with final thoughts.

For standard coding guidelines, the diagnosis is all that is required to be listed in the A/P; however, the HCC coding guidelines require a Diagnosis, Status, and Plan (“DSP”). The A/P should include a minimum of the diagnosis and status OR the diagnosis and plan, but preferably all 3 should be documented to cover all bases and to provide the best documented care for the patient. The DSP includes:

  • Diagnosis: Signs, symptoms, disease (signs and symptoms are not to be documented if a definitive diagnosis is provided).
  • Status: Disease regression, progression, test results, medication, response to treatment.
  • Plan: Diagnostic testing orders, discussion of disease with the patient, reviewing outside records, providing counseling and referral to another provider, prescribe medications, therapy, and other modalities.

The A/P is going to make or break your risk adjustment payments if the diagnoses are not properly documented and assessed according to the above-mentioned model.

Now, assuming all conditions are documented properly, how do the v24 and v28 models compare to / affect your reimbursement?  Let’s take a look!

ICD-10Descriptionv24RAF Scorev28RAF Score
E10.22Type 1 Diabetes with CKDHCC180.252HCC370.154
E11.22Type 2 Diabetes with CKDHCC180.252HCC370.154
I12.9Hypertensive CKD stage 1-4N/A0N/A0
I12.0Hypertensive CKD stage 5-6HCC1360.241HCC3260.756
I13.0Hypertensive CKD 1-4 with Heart FailureHCC850.276HCC2260.334
I13.10Hypertensive CKD 1-4 without Heart FailureN/A0N/A0
I13.11Hypertensive CKD 5-6 without Heart FailureHCC1360.241HCC3260.756
I13.2Hypertensive CKD 5-6 with Heart FailureHCC85 & HCC1360.276 & 0.241HCC226 & HCC3260.334 & 0.756
 Also code the stage of CKD    
N18.1Chronic Kidney Disease, stage 1N/A0N/A0
N18.2Chronic Kidney Disease, stage 2N/A0N/A0
N18.31Chronic Kidney Disease, stage 3aHCC1380.058HCC3290.118
N18.32Chronic Kidney Disease, stage 3bHCC1380.058HCC3280.118
N18.4Chronic Kidney Disease, stage 4HCC1370.241HCC3270.477
N18.5Chronic Kidney Disease, stage 5HCC1360.241HCC3260.756
N18.6Chronic Kidney Disease, stage 6 (ESRD)HCC1360.241HCC3260.756
Z99.2Dependence on renal dialysisHCC1340.363N/A0
Z91.15Noncompliance with renal dialysisHCC1340.363N/A0

As you can see, there are several drastic changes that occur between RAF scores related to CKD.  In the v28 model, the RAF scores go up (all except DM with CKD).  You can also see RAF scores for dialysis status codes disappear in the v28 model and the RAF scores rise dramatically for higher stages of CKD. This makes it all the more imperative CKD staging is documented and addressed properly using the DSP method described in this article.

 

Consequences

What happens when codes which risk adjust are submitted without proper support?  The Office of the Inspector General (“OIG”) released their compliance audit of diagnosis codes that Humana, Inc (“Humana”) submitted to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) for payment year 2015 for their Florida Seniors program.  The OIG found 1,322 of the 1,525 sampled HCCs were validated but the remaining 203 HCCs were not. Of those 203 invalid HCCs, twenty (20) were replaced with twenty-two (22) different HCCs reflecting either more, or sometimes less severe, manifestations of the diseases which were originally submitted.  An additional 15 HCCs were supported by the medical records but were not submitted to CMS by Humana.  The result of this audit was Humana was overpaid $197.7 million dollars for just one state!

Accuracy by both providers and HCC risk adjustment coders is critical.  There is an important and subtle balance in our field which affects both the general public and enrollees in Medicare Advantage (“MA”) plans.  When risk adjusted codes are submitted, but not supported, CMS overpays the MA plans using federal money (tax dollars) which directly affects the general tax paying public (us).  Over ninety percent (90%) of patients will never be audited.  When diagnoses are not submitted properly using the correct diagnosis codes, or not submitted at all, this directly affects the funds needed so patients receive the care they deserve.  As risk adjustment coders, it is essential to code accurately, truthfully, and always with integrity.

 

For more information, please contact Consultant, HCC Coding/Audit and Education Kristina Finley at KFinley@AskPHC.com or 904-859-3170.

In the introduction, we discussed the three (3) edit types that make up the National Correct Coding Initiative (“NCCI”). Probably the most familiar of those edits are the procedure to procedure (“PTP”) edits, which bundle two codes together.

Don’t be tempted to underestimate this edit type. A common misconception is if two codes are bundled, you can just add a modifier 59.

First, there are quite a few “unbundling” modifiers. Modifier 59 should be the modifier of last resort.

Other NCCI unbundling modifiers are the anatomical modifiers (E1-E4, FA, F1-F9, TA, T1-T9, LT, RT, LC, LD, RC, LM, RI), the global surgery modifiers (24, 25, 57, 58, 78, 79), and the “other” modifiers (27, 59, 91, XE, XS, XP, XU). The NCCI manual explains it is important to select the most appropriate modifier for the job.

A great example of this is using the LT and RT modifiers, instead of 59, when the codes are on contralateral sides of the body.

Another great example is when LC, LD, RC, LM and RI are used to indicate separate vessels for Cardiology procedures.

PTP edits define when two codes (code pair) should not be billed together, except under certain circumstances.  A good example to illustrate this is not billing for insertion of venous access (to administer drugs) for a surgical procedure because this would fall under “standard of care.”

Each code pair has a correct coding modifier indicator (“CCMI”) assigned to it. To determine what CCMI is associated with a code pair, review the NCCI edit for that code pair. The “official” way to do this is to download the NCCI Provider PTP edits. They are updated quarterly, so you will need to review the edits which correspond to the specific date of service. We have posted the link where you can find these edits below. However, there are other ways to review PTP edits which may be easier to navigate:

  • Some of the Medicare Administrative Contractors (“MACs”) have NCCI tools on their websites. We have provided several below for you.
  • Another option is to purchase coding software that includes an NCCI bundling tool.
  • Once you determine the CCMI for your code pair is, you need to understand what that modifier indicator means. A modifier indicator 0 means NCCI PTP modifiers cannot be used to unbundle the edit pair. We will discuss a caveat to this later.
  • Modifier indicator 1 means if the circumstances support it, a NCCI PTP modifier can be used to unbundle the edit pair.
  • Modifier indicator 9 means the use of a NCCI PTP modifier is not specified. This should be when codes have been deleted from the NCCI edits. It is basically a place holder.

The main two indicators to be concerned with are 0 and 1.

Let’s look at some bundling edits that exist for code 20610 (Arthrocentesis, aspiration and/or injection, major joint or bursa (e.g., shoulder, hip, knee, subacromial bursa); without ultrasound guidance).

If you look at the edits for code 20610 you will see it is bundled with code 99156 (Moderate sedation services provided by a physician or other qualified health care professional other than the physician or other qualified health care professional performing the diagnostic or therapeutic service that the sedation supports; initial 15 minutes of intraservice time, patient age 5 years or older), but the modifier indicator is 0. This means you should not unbundle the code pair.

However, code 20610 is also bundled with code 96372 (Therapeutic, prophylactic, or diagnostic injection; subcutaneous or intramuscular), but for this pair the modifier indicator is 1. This indicates if the clinical circumstances and documentation were to support it, you could append an NCCI modifier to unbundle the code pair.

Now for the caveat we teased above. Even if a code pair has a modifier indicator of 0, did you know that you still have recourse to get the pair paid if the clinical circumstances are unusual?  Yes, you read that correctly. Even though you cannot append an NCCI unbundling modifier, you can append modifier 22. Then your Medicare Administrative Contractor (“MAC”) will evaluate your unusual service to see if it supports additional payment.

This is a little-known loophole found on page 15, Chapter 1 of the 2024 NCCI manual. Remember, this is only to be used if the circumstances are highly unusual and is supported by your documentation. The manual gives a great surgical example involving code 69990 (Microsurgical techniques, requiring use of operating microscope).

Make sure to watch for our next article where we will discuss some of the finer points of medically unlikely edits (“MUE”).

Keeping up with the nuances of NCCI edits can be exhausting. PERCS is here to help you navigate guidelines to remain compliant. If you have any questions or need assistance, please contact Angie Wood, CPC, Sr. Physician Auditor and Educator at AWood@AskPHC.com or Lori Carlin, CPC, COC, CPCO, CCS, CRC, Principal, at LCarlin@AskPHC.com. They will be readily available to answer your questions and provide expert advice so you are well equipped to move forward!

References:

https://www.cms.gov/medicare/coding-billing/national-correct-coding-initiative-ncci-edits/medicare-ncci-policy-manual

https://www.cms.gov/medicare/coding-billing/national-correct-coding-initiative-ncci-edits/medicare-ncci-procedure-procedure-ptp-edits

https://www.palmettogba.com/palmetto/jjb.nsf/DID/ES9QVHBJMD

https://www.novitas-solutions.com/selfservice/faces/NCCI_Nov_B.jspx;jsessionid=pAbWoDokkusX8NpqvJmBlxkMq5O8NCImOj5zG5X-_p7BCy5CwKPh!468147359

https://www.cgsmedicare.com/medicare_dynamic/j15/ptpb/ptp/ptp.aspx

One of the best resources we frequently recommend to providers is the National Correct Coding Initiative (“NCCI”) policy manual. It is like using a crystal ball to peer into the mind of CMS. The policy manual explains why CMS has edits that bundle two codes together, or why CMS limits how many units of a particular code you can bill. More importantly, the manual explains when it is appropriate to override these edits and how to do it correctly.

This manual serves as a toolkit for providers, coders, and billers alike.  We recommend dedicating specific time to read chapter one “General Correct Coding Policies.”  This chapter is packed full of very helpful information about edits and could easily be used for discussion topics between colleagues or as the basis for educational sessions.

There are three main NCCI edit types:

  • procedure to procedure (“PTP”) edits
  • medically unlikely edits (“MUE”)
  • add-on code (“AOC”) edits.

In this article series, we will cover all three of the edit types and give you strategies on how to address them. Probably the most familiar of these edits are PTP edits. These edits indicate when a pair of codes should not be billed together. In our next article, we will discuss PTP edits in detail.

To download a copy of the NCCI policy manual, click the link in the references section below.

Keeping up with the nuances of NCCI edits can be exhausting. PERCS is here to help you navigate guidelines to remain compliant. If you have any questions or need assistance, please contact Angie Wood, CPC, Sr. Physician Auditor and Educator at AWood@AskPHC.com or Lori Carlin, CPC, COC, CPCO, CCS, CRC, Principal, at LCarlin@AskPHC.com. They will be readily available to answer your questions and provide expert advice, so you are well equipped to move forward!

References:

https://www.cms.gov/medicare/coding-billing/national-correct-coding-initiative-ncci-edits/medicare-ncci-policy-manual