Querying when a Pending COVID-19 Test Returns Results

Don’t query for every result.

There are many different ways we investigate infectious diseases with current technology. In the case of COVID-19, research labs might culture the living organism, the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The widely used Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR, or PCR) test qualitatively detects nucleic acid from the viral ribonucleic acid (RNA), requiring viral genetic material. There are now rapid antigen tests, which can detect fragments of proteins found on or within the virus. Finally, there are antibody, or serological, tests, which assess whether or not antibodies have been made in an immune response to the viral infection.

Each of these tests has its own accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and challenges. Not all test results come back in a clinical timely fashion. We are having issues with availability of COVID-19 testing, nationally and globally. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been issuing emergency use authorizations (EUAs) for tests at an unprecedented pace, but there are still many tests that have not been approved.

The tests to diagnose current COVID-19 infection have significant false negative rates. The PCR testing has up to 30 percent, and the rapid antigen testing is noted to have a 15-20-percent false negative rate. Some of these tests take hours, and some take days to yield results.

This means that patients will sometimes be discharged or die prior to the results of their COVID-19 tests being known. The American Hospital Association/American Health Information Management Association (AHA/AHIMA) guidance advises developing facility-specific coding guidelines to hold back coding of inpatient admissions and outpatient encounters until test results are available. They recommend querying the provider if the test results come back negative, even if the provider documented a diagnosis of COVID-19 on a clinical basis, to give them “the opportunity to reconsider the diagnosis based on the new information.”

In my opinion, as a physician and an ex-physician advisor, I can categorically assure you that it would irritate a provider to get queried to confirm a diagnosis they had already made clinically and documented in a codable format. I agree with developing facility-specific coding guidelines, but they should be sensible and reasonable.

Here are my suggestions:

Concordant documentation and testing (they match):

  • “COVID-19 by clinical judgment” test returns positive: code without query. Send feedback notification informing the provider of a positive result. The provider may addend the record with the confirmatory result if they so choose.
  • “Acute gastroenteritis. Doubt COVID-19” test returns negative: do not code COVID-19 (code symptoms and exposure). Do not query. Notification is not necessary, but could be done on an informational basis.
  • “Fever and cough, probable COVID-19” test returns positive: code without query. Send confirmatory notification informing provider of positive result. The provider may addend the record with the confirmatory result if they so choose.

Discordant documentation and testing (they don’t match):

  • “COVID-19 by clinical judgment” test returns negative:
    • If clinical indicators are supportive, code without query. Send feedback notification informing provider of positive result. It would be best practice for them to document the negative result and explain that they think it is a false negative.
    • If clinical indicators do not support diagnosis, generate a clinical validation query.
  • “Acute gastroenteritis. Doubt COVID-19” test returns positive: code COVID-19. Send notification informing provider of positive result and request addendum for the record.
  • “Fever and cough, probable COVID-19” test returns negative: query for clarification if they haven’t proactively addressed likelihood of false negative test result. Does the provider believe this is a false negative? Do they want to revise their diagnosis? Without a definitive diagnosis, this should be coded as signs and symptoms and Z20.828, the exposure code.

No mention of COVID-19 or testing in documentation, but testing done: this may ultimately result in denial of payment for the testing if there is no clearly identifiable justification for why the test was performed.

  • If positive: code COVID-19. Send notification informing provider of positive result and request addendum for the record. This notification should educate that best practice is to always document a reason as to why COVID-19 testing is being done (e.g., due to potential exposure, patient request, etc.).
  • If negative: send notification informing the provider that best practice is to always document a reason as to why COVID-19 testing is being done (e.g., due to potential exposure, patient request, etc.). Code exposure (since we are in pandemic situation).

Don’t query for every result. Providers will change their behavior if they understand why it is being asked of them, and if it isn’t an excessive encumbrance. They do not appreciate additional documentation burden for no good reason. Give them a good reason.

Example of verbiage for notification/request for addendum due to return of pending test results:

Positive results:

Dear Dr. Doe,
Patient X, MRN 12345, was seen on (date) and a COVID-19 test was performed. They were discharged/died prior to the return of the results (i.e., results were pending).
Your diagnosis was (diagnosis).
The results of the test were positive.
□  Coding rules permit coders to pick up the diagnosis of COVID-19 based on a positive test. You did not make the diagnosis during the encounter. This notification is to inform you of the results of the test and to ask you to addend the medical record according to facility coding guidelines.
□  Coding rules permit coders to pick up the diagnosis of COVID-19 based on a positive test. You made an uncertain diagnosis, which has now been confirmed. This notification is to inform you of the results of the test and to give you the opportunity to addend the medical record if you are so inclined.
□  Coding rules permit coders to pick up the diagnosis of COVID-19 based on a positive test. Since you made the clinical diagnosis of COVID-19, no action is necessary at this time. This notification is informational only, although you may addend the record with the results of the test if you so choose.
□  Coding rules permit coders to pick up the diagnosis of COVID-19 based on a positive test. There was no mention of COVID-19, and the documentation in the record did not give a rationale for why the test was done. This notification is to inform you of the results of the test and to ask you to addend the medical record accordingly. In the future, please document the medical necessity for ordering and performing the test. For COVID-19, the rationale may be potential exposure during pandemic/epidemic and/or signs/symptoms.

Negative results:

Dear Dr. Doe,
Patient X, MRN 12345, was seen on (date) and a COVID-19 test was performed. They were discharged/died prior to the return of the results.
Your diagnosis was (diagnosis).
The results of the test were negative.
□  You made a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19, and the results are discordant.
      • If you believe this is a false negative, best practice would be to addend the medical record accordingly.
      • If a negative result has made you reconsider the diagnosis, please addend the medical record and update your diagnosis.

□  You made an uncertain diagnosis of COVID-19, and the results are discordant.

      • If you believe this is a false negative, best practice would be to addend the medical record accordingly.
      • If a negative result has made you reconsider the diagnosis, please addend the medical record and update your diagnosis.
□  You did not mention COVID-19. The documentation in the record did not give a rationale for why the test was done. This notification is to inform you of the results of the test and to ask you to addend the medical record accordingly. In the future, please document the medical necessity for ordering and performing the test. For COVID-19, the rationale may be potential exposure during pandemic/epidemic and/or signs/symptoms.
□  You ruled out the diagnosis of COVID-19 during the encounter. No action is necessary at this time. This notification is informational only, although you may addend the record with the results of the test if you so choose.

One of our Talk Ten Tuesdays listeners shared with me that her facility uses a query when a COVID-19 test returns negative, but the provider documents that COVID-19 is still suspected in an uncodable format. I have made some minor tweaks:

Query for negative COVID-19 test results with uncertain COVID-19 documentation:

This patient presented with (include symptoms/conditions) and was worked up for COVID-19. Negative COVID-19 test results were acknowledged, and it is documented that COVID-19 is still suspected (uncertain diagnosis verbiage).

Based on clinical impression at the time of discharge, please select the most appropriate contributing etiology:

() COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2), although testing was negative

() Possible COVID-19, uncertainty remains

() Other contributing organism (please specify)…

() Unable to clinically determine

() Other (please specify)…

Programming Note: Listen to Dr. Erica Remer every Tuesday on Talk Ten Tuesdays, 10-10:30 a.m. EST.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Erica Remer, MD, FACEP, CCDS, ACPA-C

Erica Remer, MD, FACEP, CCDS, ACPA-C has a unique perspective as a practicing emergency physician for 25 years, with extensive coding, CDI, and ICD-10 expertise. As physician advisor for University Hospitals Health System in Cleveland, Ohio for four years, she trained 2,700 providers in ICD-10, closed hundreds of queries, fought numerous DRG clinical determination and medical necessity denials, and educated CDI specialists and healthcare providers with engaging, case-based presentations. She transitioned to independent consulting in July 2016. Dr. Remer is a member of the ICD10monitor editorial board and is the co-host on the popular Talk Ten Tuesdays weekly, live Internet radio broadcasts.

Related Stories

Leave a Reply

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

Featured Webcasts

2026 IPPS Masterclass 3: Master MS-DRG Shifts and NTAPs

2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 3: MS-DRG Shifts and NTAPs

This third session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature a review of FY26 changes to the MS-DRG methodology and new technology add-on payments (NTAPs), presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.

August 14, 2025
2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 2: Master ICD-10-PCS Changes

2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 2: Master ICD-10-PCS Changes

This second session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature a review the FY26 changes to ICD-10-PCS codes. This information will be presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.

August 13, 2025
2026 IPPS Masterclass 1: Master ICD-10-CM Changes

2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 1: Master ICD-10-CM Changes

This first session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature an in-depth explanation of FY26 changes to ICD-10-CM codes and guidelines, CCs/MCCs, and revisions to the MCE, presented by presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.

August 12, 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