The dilemma of coding COVID-19 is revealed.
One of the things that delights me about ICD-10-CM is that I find new codes (codes new to me, that is) almost daily. And I also think ICD-10-CM is pretty logical; the answers to conundrums are there, if you have faith that almost every scenario can be described in codes.
I monitor some of the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA) forums, and the day before Christmas, a question was posed as to how to code drive-up COVID-19 testing. Let me preface this with two disclaimers: first, I am not a coder; I just play one on Talk Ten Tuesdays. And second, I have no idea whether payers are going to pay for the diagnoses that make sense to me.
A poster named Jennifer suggested the possibility of using Z02.0 and Z02.1 on the claims, so I looked them up. I squealed with delight when I read the descriptions. Z02.0 is Encounter for examination for admission to educational institution, and Z02.1 is Encounter for pre-employment examination (although indexing seems to land “employment examination” here, too). In this same set of encounters for administrative examinations, I also found Z02.2, Encounter for examination to residential institution. Intuitively, these fit with COVID-19 testing for permission to return back to school or work or a nursing home. Indeed, Z02.5, Encounter for examination for participation in sport, probably also pertains to those naughty athletes who slip out of their professional sports bubbles and end up with potential exposure.
The forum question also noted that Z11.59, the generic screening code, was causing a battle, and Jennifer didn’t think this should be listed on these claims because, “you know, we are in a pandemic.” Let’s tackle that one first. She is completely correct – there is no screening in pandemics. I am going to refer you all to the updated Official Coding Guidelines, page 31, where the revision for 2021 regarding screening during the pandemic reads, “do not assign code Z11.52, Encounter for screening for COVID-19,” in bright red letters.
The instructions for routine and administrative examinations also have a few caveats, which introduce some uncertainty. The codes are “not to be used if the examination is for diagnosis of a suspected condition, or for treatment purposes.” I interpret this to mean that if the patient were to have a genuine concern that they have (in this case) COVID-19, and the exam and testing were aimed at ruling disease in/out (as opposed to being performed for administrative purposes), you wouldn’t use a Z02.- code.
The second ambiguous sentence is “pre-existing and chronic conditions and history codes may also be included as additional codes, as long as the examination is for administrative purposes and not focused on any particular condition.” At first I was wondering if this really did exclude COVID-19 testing from being done under the Z02.- umbrella – there is a focus on a particular condition. Then I considered Z02.4, Encounter for examination for driving license. You do not undergo a comprehensive physical examination for this; you have your vision tested, and perhaps reflexes and judgment. It is my opinion that the heart of the matter is what the purpose of the specific or general assessment is (can you see well enough to drive? Do you have scoliosis or a heart arrhythmia, which would preclude participating in sports? Are you infected with a communicable disease, which would make you a risk to colleagues and customers?) – not what or how many body systems are being examined, evaluated, assessed, or tested.
Accordingly, Z02.- codes intuitively make sense to me for situations in which an entity other than the patient or the medical provider (in other words, an administrative entity) is requesting or demanding a test (like a judge ordering a paternity test in Z02.81). Situations like your job or college requiring a negative COVID-19 test to permit you to work or to return to campus after spring break would fall into that administrative category.
If a patient presents to a drive-up testing facility asking for a COVID-19 test because their boss or school demands one, a Z02.- code may be appropriate. It appears that you are permitted to use the exposure code in conjunction.
If the drive-up individual is asking for a COVID-19 test because they are concerned they may have had an exposure and they want to know if they are infected, then Z20.822, Contact with and (suspected) exposure to COVID-19, would be the correct ICD-10-CM code. If the person has symptoms prompting the testing, the symptoms would be the diagnosis codes, and Z20.822 could, again, be a secondary diagnosis.
What happens if one of these administrative tests is done on an inpatient basis, e.g., the skilled nursing facility (SNF) has to have a negative COVID-19 test to permit a return to the patient’s bed? Since Z02.- is a mandatory principal or first-listed diagnosis, it is obviously inappropriate to code.
How about a follow-up after a bout of COVID-19? We are instructed to use Z09, Encounter for follow-up examination after completed treatment for conditions other than malignant neoplasm, plus Z86.16, Personal history of COVID-19. Can you use Z02.- as well? If I read the guidelines correctly, you may, but the Z02.- would have to be first-listed.
Finally, if any of these tests turn out to be positive, unless a provider documents otherwise (e.g., “I believe the positive test represents viral remnants and do not believe the patient currently has COVID-19”), the U07.1 code for COVID-19 would depose Z20.822.
The last consideration that I alluded to in the introduction is, “will payers pay for Z02.-?” I have a concern that they would not, but I have to confess that I am a theoretician. I don’t submit claims, and likewise, I am not privy to denials, unless one of you or a client shares that with me. I also do not know practically, if you used both Z02.- and Z20.822, whether the payer would pick up the Z20.822 and reimburse the claim based on that being a legitimate, medically necessary diagnosis.
Crowd-sourcing time: what do you think? Have you used this set of codes? Did the payers pay? Let us know! Email us at editor@icd10monitor.com
None of you have let me know yet whether the insurers are paying for Z02.- codes, but I have been informed that the American Hospital Association (AHA) Coding Clinic’s advice for return to work is to use Z02.89, Encounter for other administrative examinations. Z02.0, Encounter for examination for admission to educational institution, is confirmed as being the correct code to use for return-to-school COVID-19 testing. If the patient has had exposure and school/work are mandating testing, you use the same codes, along with Z20.822, Contact with and (suspected) exposure to COVID-19.
EDITOR’S NOTE: With Halloween on the radar, ICD10monitor Contributor Christine Geiger, Assistant Vice President of Acute and Post-Acute Coding Services for the St. Louis-based First
Wrapping up our discussion of the ICD-10-CM and PCS code updates released on Oct. 1, in this article we will examine some PCS-related changes. I
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
Join Angela Comfort, DBA, MBA, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, as she presents effective strategies to strengthen collaboration between CDI, coding, and quality departments in acute care hospitals. Angela will also share guidance on implementing cross-departmental meetings, using shared KPIs, and engaging leadership to foster a culture of collaboration. Attendees will gain actionable tools to optimize documentation accuracy, elevate quality metrics, and drive a unified approach to healthcare goals, ultimately enhancing both patient outcomes and organizational performance.
Optimize your outpatient clinical documentation and gain comprehensive knowledge from foundational practices to advanced technologies, ensuring improved patient care and organizational and financial success. This webcast bundle provides a holistic approach to outpatient CDI, empowering you to implement best practices from the ground up and leverage advanced strategies for superior results. You will gain actionable insights to improve documentation quality, patient care, compliance, and financial outcomes.
Enhancing outpatient clinical documentation is crucial for maintaining accuracy, compliance, and proper reimbursement in today’s complex healthcare environment. This webcast, presented by industry expert Angela Comfort, DBA, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, will provide you with actionable strategies to tackle complex challenges in outpatient documentation. You’ll learn how to craft detailed clinical narratives, utilize advanced EHR features, and implement accurate risk adjustment and HCC coding. The session also covers essential regulatory updates to keep your documentation practices compliant. Join us to gain the tools you need to improve documentation quality, support better patient care, and ensure financial integrity.
This webcast, presented by Angela Comfort, DBA, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, a recognized expert with over 30 years of experience, offers essential strategies to improve outpatient clinical documentation integrity. You will learn how to enhance the accuracy and completeness of patient records by adopting best practices in coding and incorporating Social Determinants of Health (SDOH). The session also highlights the role of technology, such as EHRs and CDI software, in improving documentation quality. By attending, you will gain practical insights into ensuring precise and compliant documentation, supporting patient care, and optimizing reimbursement. This webcast is crucial for those looking to address documentation gaps and elevate their coding practices.
Dr. Ronald Hirsch provides critical details on the new Medicare Appeal Process for Status Changes for patients whose status changes during their hospital stay. He also delves into other scenarios of hospital patients receiving custodial care or medically unnecessary services where patient notifications may be needed along with the processes necessary to ensure compliance with state and federal guidance.
Healthcare organizations face complex regulatory requirements under the No Surprises Act and Price Transparency rules. These policies mandate extensive fee disclosures across settings, and confusion is widespread—many hospitals remain unaware they must post every contracted rate. Non-compliance could lead to costly penalties, financial loss, and legal risks. Join David M. Glaser Esq. as he shows you how to navigate these regulations effectively.
Protect your facility from unwanted audits! Join Becky Jacobsen, BSN, RN, MBS, CCS-P, CPC, CPEDC, CBCS, CEMC, and take a deep dive into both the CMS and AMA guidelines for reporting post operative pain blocks. You’ll learn how to determine if the nerve block is separately codable with real life examples for better understanding. Becky will also cover how to evaluate whether documentation supports medical necessity, offer recommendations for stronger documentation practices, and provide guidance on educating providers about documentation requirements. She’ll include a discussion of appropriate modifier and diagnosis coding assignment so that you can be confident that your billing of post operative pain blocks is fully supported and compliant.
During this RACmonitor webcast Dr. Ronald Hirsch spotlights the areas of the OIG’s Work Plan and the findings of their most recent audits that impact utilization review, case management, and audit staff. He also provides his common-sense interpretation of the prevailing regulations related to those target issues. You’ll walk away better equipped with strategies to put in place immediately to reduce your risk of paybacks, increased scrutiny, and criminal penalties.
Copyright © 2024 ICD10monitor. Powered by MedLearn Media.
Prepare for the 2025 CMS IPPS Final Rule with ICD10monitor’s IPPSPalooza! Click HERE to learn more
Get 15% OFF on all educational webcasts at ICD10monitor with code JULYFOURTH24 until July 4, 2024—start learning today!
👻Spooky Sale is Back!👻 Get 31% off all three Medlearn brands, using code SPOOKY24.
