ICD-10: Pitfalls of Noncompliant Queries

Noncompliant queries can be overt or subtle.

The underlying hallmark of clinical documentation integrity (CDI) programs is the query process utilized to clarify documentation from a diagnosis perspective.

Much emphasis is placed upon ensuring the issuing of a compliant query by the clinical documentation integrity specialists, reinforced by the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA) Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice Brief (2016 Update) (AHIMA Practice Brief).

CDI leadership at most healthcare facilities take painstaking efforts at ensuring compliant queries through the auditing process, as well as educating and reeducating staff on the constructs of compliant queries. The first paragraph of the AHIMA Practice Brief drives the tone and spirit of compliant queries with the following:

  • In court, an attorney can’t “lead” a witness into a statement. In hospitals, coders and clinical documentation specialists can’t “lead” healthcare providers with queries. Therefore, appropriate etiquette must be followed when querying providers for additional health record information.

Despite overemphasis upon compliant queries, I am still observing in my own CDI practice existence of noncompliant queries in some form or fashion. Noncompliant queries can be overt or subtle, depending upon how the query is structured and worded; on face value, a query may appear to meet the definition of and be characterized as compliant, yet when you drill down further with respect to the clinical facts and information available in the chart, the query can suddenly appear to be noncompliant in nature.

Compliant Querying: Reality vs. Face Value
The practice brief outlines in detail the format and mechanics of compliant queries, providing excellent examples. What do I mean when referring to “reality” versus “face value?” “Reality” implies that CDI specialists follow the query practice brief guidelines in constructing their queries, providing relevant clinical indicators in the body of each and providing multiple responses, including “unable to determine” and/or “other.”

Often overlooked despite being critically important is the clinical picture, patient acuity, and severity, which often further support the diagnosis in question. A perfect example is a query for sepsis: the patient workup and treatment may support a diagnosis of sepsis with elevated WBC, lactic acid levels, bands, temperature, SIRs criteria, etc. However, when you take the time to read the chronological description of the history of present illness (H&P), constitutional portion of the physical exam, and clinical impression, a query for sepsis can appear on face value to be inappropriate and not clinically justified. Merely asking a physician to document a diagnosis through the query process, using clinical indicators without an accurate and complete picture of a patient with the diagnosis of record, constitutes a noncompliant query, in my mind.

We are all too familiar with these types of queries:

  • A 72-year-old patient presents to the emergency department with documented altered mental status, elevated white blood cell count, and elevated temperature. Blood cultures are ordered, and the patient is receiving appropriate antibiotics. Constitutional physical exam states that the patient is alert and oriented, resting comfortably in bed with no apparent distress.
  • A 75-year-old patient presents to the emergency department with classic signs of urinary tract infection, including frequency, urgency, nocturia, and dysuria. Patient was prescribed outpatient antibiotics for the UTI but was not compliant with the regimen, presenting to the ED with worsening UTI and exhibiting some early signs of sepsis. Query was issued on day two for sepsis using appropriate clinical indicators for sepsis and encephalopathy. The physician in his H&P stated in the physical exam under constitutional, once again alert and oriented in all four quadrants. Progress note under clinical impressions contains the documentation of sepsis with partially treated UTI, as well as encephalopathy secondary to sepsis.

What are the specific ramifications of issuing these noncompliant queries? Ultimately, these types of queries contribute to unnecessary, avoidable, and costly DRG validation and clinical validation denials that require ongoing administrative burden associated with a lengthy, arduous appeals process. Every hospital is experiencing escalating clinical validation denials and DRG validation downcodes associated with cases billed with one major comorbidity or complication (MCC) or CC, making for easy picking, ripe for takebacks and refuting of diagnoses by third-party payers.

There is no doubt in my mind that flaws in CDI and the query process contributes to increasing denials currently being experienced, adding to concerns over closely watched key performance indicators and costs to collect.

Another Potential Ramification: The Noncompliant Query
Another potential ramification of noncompliant queries is rooted in the medicolegal environment. There have been, from time to time, instances in which a query construed to be noncompliant was caught in the deep web of a malpractice case, wherein the question arose if the CDI specialist issuing the query was attempting to report what was alleged to be an untoward outcome of care in a potentially positive light through the actions of a clinical clarification query. There have been times, likewise, when a CDI specialist was deposed as part of legal proceedings of such a case. There is simply more than meets the eye here, with significant potential downstream ramifications for noncompliant queries, regardless of whether they adhere to the guidance in the AHIMA guidelines.

Word to the Wise
A word to the wise for all CDI professionals is become more cognizant of the entire clinical picture of the record, as opposed to focusing upon the clinical indicators as justification for a compliant query. A compliant query requires the ability to understand and appreciate the extent, depth, and breadth of the documentation, which should sufficiently communicate each patient’s story. I have always advocated for CDI to focus upon and remain committed to enhancing the value and completeness of communication of patient care for all the right reasons, notwithstanding the material benefit to the patient of furthering fully informed, coordinated, quality-focused care. Coupling this philosophy of clinical documentation integrity that embraces a true and accurate reporting of the patient’s story and being able to find the patient in the story will go a long way toward ensuring a compliant medical record, with coding and billing for optimal reimbursement.

Today’s approach to CDI puts the cart before the horse. It simply is not possible to achieve a compliant query without complete and accurate documentation that best communicates patient care.

Comment on this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Related Stories

Defining High-Quality Documentation

Defining High-Quality Documentation

Last week I wrote about the importance of defining what clinical documentation is, within the scope of clinical documentation integrity (CDI) reviews. This week, I’ll

Read More

Leave a Reply

Please log in to your account to comment on this article.

Featured Webcasts

The Cost of Ignoring Risk Adjustment: How HCCs Impact Revenue & Compliance

The Cost of Ignoring Risk Adjustment: How HCCs Impact Revenue & Compliance

Stop revenue leakage and boost hospital performance by mastering risk adjustment and HCCs. This essential webcast with expert Cheryl Ericson, RN, MS, CCDS, CDIP, will reveal how inaccurate patient acuity documentation leads to lost reimbursements through penalties from poor quality scores. Learn the critical differences between HCCs and traditional CCs/MCCs, adapt your CDI workflows, and ensure accurate payments in Medicare Advantage and value-based care models. Perfect for HIM leaders, coders, and CDI professionals.  Don’t miss this chance to protect your hospital’s revenue and reputation!

May 29, 2025
I050825

Mastering ICD-10-CM Coding for Diabetes and it’s Complications: Avoiding Denials & Ensuring Compliance

Struggling with ICD-10-CM coding for diabetes and complications? This expert-led webcast clarifies complex combination codes, documentation gaps, and sequencing rules to reduce denials and ensure compliance. Dr. Angela Comfort will provide actionable strategies to accurately link diabetes to complications, improve provider documentation, and optimize reimbursement—helping coders, CDI specialists, and HIM leaders minimize audit risks and strengthen revenue integrity. Don’t miss this chance to master diabetes coding with real-world case studies, key takeaways, and live Q&A!

May 8, 2025
2025 Coding Clinic Webcast Series

2025 ICD-10-CM/PCS Coding Clinic Update Webcast Series

Uncover critical guidance. HIM coding expert, Kay Piper, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, provides an interactive review on important information in each of the AHA’s 2025 ICD-10-CM/PCS Quarterly Coding Clinics in easy-to-access on-demand webcasts, available shortly after each official publication.

April 14, 2025

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

The Two-Midnight Rule: New Challenges, Proven Strategies

The Two-Midnight Rule: New Challenges, Proven Strategies

RACmonitor is proud to welcome back Dr. Ronald Hirsch, one of his most requested webcasts. In this highly anticipated session, Dr. Hirsch will break down the complex Two Midnight Rule Medicare regulations, translating them into clear, actionable guidance. He’ll walk you through the basics of the rule, offer expert interpretation, and apply the rule to real-world clinical scenarios—so you leave with greater clarity, confidence, and the tools to ensure compliance.

June 19, 2025
Open Door Forum Webcast Series

Open Door Forum Webcast Series

Bring your questions and join the conversation during this open forum series, live every Wednesday at 10 a.m. EST from June 11–July 30. Hosted by Chuck Buck, these fast-paced 30-minute sessions connect you directly with top healthcare experts tackling today’s most urgent compliance and policy issues.

June 11, 2025
Open Door Forum: The Changing Face of Addiction: Coding, Compliance & Care

Open Door Forum: The Changing Face of Addiction: Coding, Compliance & Care

Substance abuse is everywhere. It’s a complicated diagnosis with wide-ranging implications well beyond acute care. The face of addiction continues to change so it’s important to remember not just the addict but the spectrum of extended victims and the other social determinants and legal ramifications. Join John K. Hall, MD, JD, MBA, FCLM, FRCPC, for a critical Q&A on navigating substance abuse in 2025.  Register today and be a part of the conversation!

July 16, 2025

Trending News

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!

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24