Tag Archives: E code
Posted on 17. Sep, 2009 by atif.adnan.
October 1 is just around the corner, and that means you’ll soon need to be up and running with the latest ICD- 9 changes. Are you wondering where you should focus your time and energy?
Time-saver: This quiz on the new codes and the basics of diagnosis coding will help you determine whether you’re on the right track, or if you should work on your 2010 diagnosis coding know-how.
Question 1: Once the 2010 ICD-9 changes go into effect on Oct. 1, what diagnosis code should you report when your surgeon documents “chronic venous embolism and thrombosis of superficial veins of left arm”?
D. None of the above.
Question 2: True or false: You can never report a V code as the primary diagnosis.
Question 3: Which of the following is ICD-9 2010 diagnosis code you’ll report for a patient with an unspecified neoplasm?
Question 4: True or false: You can never report an E code as the primary diagnosis.
Question 5: Your surgeon sees a patient with a personal history of a malignant neuroendocrine tumor, which affects the surgeon’s medical decision making for treatment. To support the higher-level medical decision making, what ICD-9 2010 diagnosis code will you report?
D. All of the above.
Click ‘read more’ to check your answers.
Posted on 24. Apr, 2009 by .
The mainstream press has been buzzing about the live fir tree that Russian doctors removed from a man’s lung. Some say the story just has to be an urban myth. But here at Coding News, we have other fish to fry (or firs to code). How would you code it? Here’s the ‘op note,’ if you will.
Twenty-eight-year-old Artyom Sidorkin presented complaining of chest pain and coughing up blood. An x-ray revealed what doctors thought was a malignant lung tumor, so they took him into surgery. Instead, physicians found a 3-inch live fir tree growing in his lung tissue. One Russian surgeon thinks the young man swallowed a seed, which then grew. Please click here for full story and photos from an English-language Russian news site.
So what would be the correct coding if this case occurred in the US? How about …