Pass the AHIMA Documentation Integrity Practitioner (CDI) CDIP Questions and answers with ExamsMirror

According to the ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting, when the affected side is not documented for a condition that is commonly associated with hemiplegia or hemiparesis, such as a cerebral vascular accident, the default code is the non-dominant side. The non-dominant side is usually the left side for right-handed individuals and the right side for left-handed individuals. However, if the patient is ambidextrous, the default code is still the non-dominant side, unless the provider indicates otherwise. Therefore, in this case, the default code for cerebral vascular accident with left sided weakness is I63.532 Cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of left middle cerebral artery1.

References:

CDIP® Exam Content Outline (https://www.ahima.org/media/1z0x0x1a/cdip-exam-content-outline.pdf)

ICD-10 Code for Cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of left middle cerebral artery- I63.532- AAPC Coder1

ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting FY 2022

According to the CPT code description, 61154 is the appropriate code for a burr hole procedure for evacuation of a subdural hematoma. A burr hole is a small hole made in the skull with a surgical drill to access the brain or its coverings2. A subdural hematoma is a collection of blood between the dura mater and the arachnoid mater, which are two of the three layers that cover the brain3. The evacuation of the hematoma involves removing the clot and relieving the pressure on the brain. The other codes are not applicable for this procedure because they describe different methods of access (twist drill hole) or different purposes (biopsy or puncture)4.

References:

CDI Week 2020 Q&A: CDI and key performance indicators1

Mayo Clinic: Burr hole2

MedlinePlus: Subdural hematoma3

CPT Code Book 20234

According to the ICD-10-CM/PCS MS-DRG Definitions Manual, DRG 190 is assigned for patients with a principal diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and a major complication or comorbidity (MCC)1. Pneumonia is considered an MCC for this DRG2. Therefore, the patient in this case meets the criteria for DRG 190. The other options are incorrect because they do not match the principal diagnosis or the MCC of the patient. References:

ICD-10-CM/PCS MS-DRG Definitions Manual

ICD-10-CM/PCS MS-DRG v38.0 Definitions Manual - MDC 4: Diseases and Disorders of the Respiratory System

According to the AHIMA/ACDIS Query Practice Brief, one of the scenarios that warrants a query is when there is clinical evidence of a higher degree of specificity or severity1. In this case, the patient’s COPD exacerbation and oxygen therapy may indicate a higher level of respiratory impairment than chronic respiratory failure alone. Therefore, a query to the provider to see if acute on chronic respiratory failure is supported by the health record is appropriate and compliant. Acute on chronic respiratory failure is a more specific and severe diagnosis that may affect the patient’s severity of illness, risk of mortality, and reimbursement2. The other options are not correct because they either assume a diagnosis without querying the provider, or query for a less specific or severe diagnosis than what the clinical indicators suggest. References:

Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice (2019 Update) - AHIMA

Q&A: Respiratory failure in a drug overdose | ACDIS

A rebilling is permissible when queries are answered after the initial bill, as long as the hospital follows the appropriate guidelines and procedures for rebilling, such as submitting a corrected claim within the timely filing limit, notifying the payer of the reason for rebilling, and documenting the query process and outcome in the health record. Rebilling may be necessary to ensure accurate coding and reporting of the patient’s condition and treatment, as well as appropriate reimbursement and quality measures. [3][3] References: 1: https://www.ahima.org/media/owmhxbv1/cdip_contentoutline_2023_final.pdf [ 3][3]: https://my.ahima.org/store/product?id=67077

facilities must develop an escalation policy for unanswered queries and address any medical staff concerns regarding queries1. If a query does not receive an appropriate professional response, the case should be referred for further review in accordance with the facility’s written escalation policy2. The escalation policy should address when the issue is brought to the physician advisor, the department director, or administration with defined actions as to the responsibilities at each level1. The policies should reflect a method of response that can realistically occur for the organization1. Therefore, reviewing the facility’s query policies and procedures is the best approach to ensure compliance and consistency in handling unanswered queries.

The other options are not advisable because they either involve skipping the escalation policy, notifying the physician advisor/champion without proper review or feedback, contacting the physician repeatedly without respecting their time or availability, or notifying the coding team without resolving the query issue.

Levophed is a brand name of norepinephrine, a medication that is similar to adrenaline and acts as a vasopressor, meaning that it constricts blood vessels and increases blood pressure. Levophed is indicated to raise blood pressure in adult patients with severe, acute hypotension (low blood pressure) that can occur with certain medical conditions or surgical procedures1. One of these conditions is septic shock, which is a life-threatening complication of sepsis, a systemic inflammatory response to infection. Septic shock is characterized by persistent hypotension despite adequate fluid resuscitation, along with signs of organ dysfunction and tissue hypoperfusion. Levophed is used as a first-line vasopressor agent in septic shock to restore adequate perfusion pressure and tissue oxygenation.

Acute respiratory failure, multiple sclerosis, and acute kidney failure are not indications for Levophed treatment. Acute respiratory failure is a condition in which the lungs cannot provide enough oxygen to the blood or remove enough carbon dioxide from the blood. It can be caused by various lung diseases, injuries, or infections. The treatment of acute respiratory failure depends on the underlying cause and the severity of the condition, but it may include oxygen therapy, mechanical ventilation, medications to treat infections or inflammation, or other supportive measures. Multiple sclerosis is a chronic autoimmune disease that affects the central nervous system, causing inflammation, demyelination, and axonal damage. The symptoms of multiple sclerosis vary depending on the location and extent of the nerve damage, but they may include vision problems, numbness, weakness, fatigue, cognitive impairment, or pain. The treatment of multiple sclerosis aims to reduce the frequency and severity of relapses, slow the progression of disability, and manage the symptoms. It may include immunomodulatory drugs, corticosteroids, symptomatic medications, physical therapy, or other interventions. Acute kidney failure is a condition in which the kidneys suddenly lose their ability to filter waste products and fluids from the blood. It can be caused by various factors that impair the blood flow to the kidneys, damage the kidney tissue, or block the urine output. The symptoms of acute kidney failure may include decreased urine output, fluid retention, nausea, confusion, or shortness of breath. The treatment of acute kidney failure depends on the underlying cause and the severity of the condition, but it may include fluid management, electrolyte replacement, dialysis, medications to treat infections or inflammation, or other supportive measures.

References:

CDIP Exam Preparation Guide, 2021 Edition. AHIMA Press. ISBN: 9781584268530

Levophed Uses, Side Effects & Warnings - Drugs.com

Levophed (Norepinephrine Bitartrate): Uses, Dosage … - RxList

Levarterenol, Levophed (norepinephrine) dosing … - Medscape

[Septic Shock: Practice Essentials … - Medscape Reference]

[Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for … - PubMed]

[Acute respiratory failure: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia]

[Multiple sclerosis - Symptoms and causes - Mayo Clinic]

[Acute kidney failure - Symptoms and causes - Mayo Clinic]

According to the AHIMA/ACDIS Query Practice Brief, one of the fundamental elements that must be in place for a successful DRG discrepancy resolution is a collaborative and respectful interaction between the coder and the CDIP1. The coder and the CDIP should communicate effectively and timely to identify and resolve any DRG mismatches, using evidence-based guidelines, coding conventions, and query standards1. The coder and the CDIP should also share their knowledge and expertise with each other, and seek clarification from the provider or the physician advisor/champion when necessary1. The other options are not considered fundamental elements for DRG discrepancy resolution, although they may be helpful or supportive in some situations. References:

Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice (2019 Update) - AHIMA

An outstanding query may result in an incomplete health record deficiency being assigned to a provider, if the query is not answered or resolved before the discharge or final coding of the patient. An outstanding query is a query that has been generated by the clinical documentation integrity practitioner (CDIP) or the coder, but has not been acknowledged or addressed by the provider. An outstanding query may affect the accuracy and completeness of the health record, as well as the coding, reimbursement, quality measures, and compliance of the hospital. References: : https://www.ahima.org/media/owmhxbv1/cdip_contentoutline_2023_final.pdf : https://my.ahima.org/store/product?id=67077

The proper sequencing of the principal and secondary diagnoses in this case is as follows:

Principal diagnosis: Acute appendicitis. This is the condition, after study, that occasioned the admission to the hospital, according to the ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting. The patient was admitted for laparoscopic surgery, which is a definitive treatment for acute appendicitis. The physician documented “possible acute appendicitis or probable Meckel diverticulitis” as the cause of the right lower quadrant abdominal pain. According to the AHA’s Coding Clinic, Fourth Quarter 2016, pp. 147-148, when a physician documents two diagnoses connected by “or”, coders should query the physician for clarification if possible. However, if a query is not possible or not answered, coders should assign codes for both conditions, unless one of them has been ruled out or confirmed by further testing or treatment. In this case, there is no indication that either acute appendicitis or Meckel diverticulitis has been ruled out or confirmed by further testing or treatment. Therefore, both conditions should be coded and reported. However, only one of them can be the principal diagnosis. Since acute appendicitis is more commonly associated with laparoscopic surgery than Meckel diverticulitis, and since it has a higher relative weight than Meckel diverticulitis under the MS-DRG system, it is reasonable to select acute appendicitis as the principal diagnosis 23.

Secondary diagnosis: Right lower quadrant abdominal pain. This is a sign or symptom that is associated with the principal diagnosis and requires clinical evaluation, therapeutic treatment, diagnostic procedures, extended length of hospital stay, or increased nursing care and/or monitoring. The patient presented with right lower quadrant abdominal pain as a manifestation of acute appendicitis or Meckel diverticulitis. The pain required clinical evaluation by abdominal ultrasound and therapeutic treatment by laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, it should be coded and reported as a secondary diagnosis 4.

Secondary diagnosis: Type I diabetes mellitus. This is a chronic condition that affects the patient’s care in terms of requiring diagnostic or therapeutic services or affecting patient outcomes or resource utilization. The patient has a history of type I diabetes mellitus and received an injection of neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin to normalize the blood sugar level prior to surgery. Therefore, it should be coded and reported as a secondary diagnosis 4.

References: 1: AHIMA CDIP Exam Prep, Fourth Edition, p. 133 2: ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting FY 2021, Section II.A 3: AHA Coding Clinic for ICD-10-CM and ICD-10-PCS, Fourth Quarter 2016 4: ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting FY 2021, Section III.C : AHIMA CDIP Exam Prep, Fourth Edition https://my.ahima.org/store/product?id=67077