JAMA & ARCHIVES
Arch Fam Med
SEARCH
GO TO ADVANCED SEARCH
HOME  PAST ISSUES  TOPIC COLLECTIONS  CME  PHYSICIAN JOBS  CONTACT US  HELP
Institution: STANFORD Univ Med Center  | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In
  Vol. 9 No. 1, January 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Series on Practice Management
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (11)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in this journal

Evaluation and Management Services

A Comparison of Medical Record Documentation With Actual Billing in Community Family Practice

George E. Kikano, MD; Meredith A. Goodwin, MS; Kurt C. Stange, MD, PhD

Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:68-71.

Objective  To compare the concordance of family physicians' billing for evaluation and management services with medical record documentation.

Design  Multimethod, cross-sectional observation study.

Setting  Eighty-four family practices in northeast Ohio.

Participants  Four thousand fifty-four outpatients visiting 138 family physicians.

Main Outcome Measure  The degree of concordance between evaluation and management Current Procedural Terminology codes billed by physicians, with those codes assigned by trained research nurses using American Medical Association criteria to code medical records for the same visits.

Results  Discrepancies between the multifactorial nature of family practice outpatient visits and the Current Procedural Terminology coding criteria, which dictate overcoding for depth rather than breadth, made coding difficult (multiple-rater {kappa} statistic between research nurses = 0.36). Among 4137 outpatient visits with complete billing information, 57% of the Current Procedural Terminology codes generated by medical record review were concordant with the actual billing code assigned by physicians. Undercoding and overcoding occurred at a similar frequency (21% and 19%, respectively) and differed by more than 1 code in fewer than 4% of visits. Visits by new patients were more likely to be inaccurately coded than visits by established patients.

Conclusions  Record documentation by community family physicians largely reflects the level of services billed using evaluation and management codes. Undercoding is as common as overcoding. Efforts from regulatory agencies should be redirected from penalizing physicians for overcoding to focusing on the development of coding criteria that reflect the multifactorial nature of outpatient primary care practice.


From the Departments of Family Medicine (Drs Kikano and Stange and Ms Goodwin) and Epidemiology and Biostatistics (Dr Stange) and the Ireland Cancer Center (Drs Kikano and Stange), Case Western Reserve University, University Hospitals of Cleveland, Cleveland, Ohio.



THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Inadequate Training in Billing and Coding as Perceived by Recent Pediatric Graduates
Andreae et al.
CLIN PEDIATR 2009;48:939-944.
ABSTRACT  

Template-Guided Versus Undirected Written Medical Documentation: A Prospective, Randomized Trial in a Family Medicine Residency Clinic
Mulvehill et al.
J Am Board Fam Med 2005;18:464-469.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Medical Illness and the Risk of Suicide in the Elderly
Juurlink et al.
Arch Intern Med 2004;164:1179-1184.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Expert Agreement in Current Procedural Terminology Evaluation and Management Coding
King et al.
Arch Intern Med 2002;162:316-320.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Is Diabetes Treated as an Acute or Chronic Illness in Community Family Practice?
Yawn et al.
Diabetes Care 2001;24:1390-1396.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  




HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | PHYSICIAN JOBS | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2000 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.