E/M Coding Alert - 2003 Issue 7
Reader Questions: Take Your Pick of 95 or 97 Guidelines
Subscribe or sign in to view the full article.
Article Overview
This reader Q&A covers evaluation and management (E/M) documentation guidance and the comparison between the 1995 and 1997 guideline structures. It is relevant to physicians, coders, auditors, and billing staff who review chart documentation for office and other E/M services. The article gives historical context, explains why the later guideline format was developed, and notes specialty-related documentation considerations.
Why This Topic Matters
Understanding the two E/M documentation guideline options helps readers interpret chart dictation, align documentation with audit expectations, and recognize why different specialties may find one approach more practical than the other.
What You Will Learn
- How the 1995 and 1997 E/M documentation guideline frameworks differ at a high level
- Why documentation review may be performed against both E/M guideline versions
- How the historical development of the later guideline format affected documentation specificity
- Why certain specialties may find one documentation framework more workable than the other
Who Should Read This
- Physicians
- Medical coders
- Billers
- Compliance staff
- Auditors
- Practice managers
Subscribe or sign in to view the full article.
Quick, Current, Complete - www.findacode.com