Top Otolaryngology (ENT) Coding Errors and How to Avoid Them

Introduction to ENT Coding Precision

As a component of the wider specialty of otolaryngology, medical coding is not a mere administrative function within your specialty, but vital for the financial and legal wellbeing of your practice. ENT practices are one of the few specialties that provide a range of services, including but not limited to, standard office visits and complex surgical procedures of the ear, nose, and throat. This range of services contributes to an increased likelihood of otolaryngology billing errors.

Coding mistakes can lead to a myriad of issues, including claims being denied, underpayments, and more attention from your payers. When these issues continue unchecked for a prolonged period, the overall impact can be detrimental to the financial and operational wellbeing of your practice. Knowing the most common ENT coding mistakes is the foundation to increasing the

Resiliency and profitability of your billing systems. This guide is designed to address common mistakes and provide practical steps to protect your practice.

Common Otolaryngology (ENT) Coding Errors

Navigating the nuances of ENT coding requires attention to detail. Many practices encounter recurring errors that disrupt the revenue cycle. Let’s examine some of the most prevalent mistakes.

Misusing Modifier 59 for Bundled Services

Perhaps the most common mistake in ENT coding relates to the application of Modifier 59. This modifier indicates that a distinct procedural service is performed that is separate from other services performed on the same day. This modifier is most commonly inappropriately used to unbundle services that should be reported together.

For example, a provider may have performed a nasal endoscopy and during that same session performed a debridement. If debridement is a routine part of the endoscopy, it is incorrect to apply Modifier 59 to bill them as if they were separate procedures. This modifier is the subject of intense scrutiny by payers, and its misuse can result in audits and claim denials.

Incorrect Coding for Laryngoscopy Procedures

While fundamental to ENT practice, laryngoscopy procedures are amongst the most commonly misunderstood when it comes to coding. The codes make a distinction between flexible and rigid laryngoscopes, and between diagnostic vs. surgical procedures. One of the more common errors is surgical laryngoscopy vs. diagnostic laryngoscopy.

Consider a scenario whereby a laryngoscopy with biopsy code is billed and there was, in fact, no tissue taken. This is a coding error. It is the only right thing to do to code in accordance with the specific instruments employed and the definite professional services that were rendered. Disparities between the procedural notes and the billed codes are a primary trigger for auditors.

Errors in Allergy Testing and Immunotherapy Billing

Billing mistakes also happen in otolaryngology allergy services. Billing for allergy testing requires specification on the kind of test performed (percutaneous or intracutaneous) and how many tests were performed. A frequent error occurs when claim submissions are incorrect due to the billing of tests performed per antigen instead of per test.

As for billing in allergy immunotherapy, there needs to be precise coding for representing the arrangements of antigens and for the injection service. If there is a failure in making a distinction of the two components or the use of old coding, there can be a negative impact on the claim, including no payment and no payment. There needs to be accurate documentation of how many and what type of allergens were involved to ensure billing was done correctly.

Improper Use of E/M Codes with Procedures

Modifier 25 is often needed when an Evaluation and Management (E/M) service is done on the same day as a minor procedure. This modifier specifies the E/M service was significant and that it was separately identifiable from the procedure.

One of the more common mistakes is appending Modifier 25 to an E/M service when the patient’s visit was for the procedure. In order for the modifier to be appropriate, the E/M service has to be more than just the standard pre-and post-operative care for the procedure. Unfortunately, the lack of adequate documentation justifying the E/M service is one of the most common reasons these claims are denied.

How to Avoid Common ENT Coding Errors

Preventing coding errors requires a combination of robust processes, ongoing education, and the right technology. Here are some medical coding best practices to implement in your otolaryngology practice.

Implement a Strong Documentation Process

Clear and detailed clinical documentation is the best defense against coding errors. Physicians should document every procedure with enough detail to support the codes being billed. This includes:

• Sinus / Nasal Cavity: CPT 31231, 31233, 31235
• Laterality: RT (Right), LT (Left), 50 (Bilateral)
• Examples: Maxillary sinus, ethmoid sinus, unilateral or bilateral involvement

Training providers on documentation requirements for common ENT procedures can bridge the gap between clinical practice and billing needs.

Invest in Continuous Coder Education

The medical coding industry consistently undergoes transformations. New codes and updated guidelines are released as payer policies change. To equip one’s staff with the necessary tools to be successful, continual education is extremely important. This education should be in teaching otolaryngology coding specific to the CPT, ICD-10-CM, and HCPCS Level II codingsystems.

Webinars, industry-related publications, and membership in professional organizations like AAPC provide valuable resources to your staff to help them overcome intractable coding problems and minimize coding mistakes in the ENT field.

Conduct Regular Internal Audits

One cannot ameliorate issues of which they are not cognizant. Conducting regular internal reviews of your coding and billing records helps uncover problematic trends and issues before they escalate. Such an audit may be handled by an internal compliance officer and/or an external consultant.

Direct such audits towards problematic areas with known high error rates such as the use of Modifiers 25 and 59, laryngoscopy procedures, and the services of allergy immunology. Utilize the findings to give tailored and more actionable feedback and training to your providers and coders, thereby improving the accuracy of your processes.

Leverage Technology and Coding Software

Modern medical coding software can assist prevent mistakes in otolaryngology billing. Medical billing systems have code checking built into them that can catch errors, such as, potential bundling conflicts, incorrect modifier usage, and other common billing errors prior to claim submission.

Technology can offer support to a certified coder, albeit without replacing them. Along with other coding tools, technology can be added to workflow for better outcomes and efficiency, ultimately increasing clean claim rates and allowing coding teams to handle complex cases.

Conclusion

Being precise in otolaryngology coding is very important for the profitability and regulatory compliance of your practice. Identifying weaknesses such as modifier misuse and laryngoscopy coding errors will help you take certain steps for more coding accuracy. Your revenue cycle would benefit more and be shielded from potential audits and denials by having documentation, education, and audit practices in place. Sustaining coding performance will strengthen the revenue cycle of your practice and allow you to spend more time on caring for your patients.