Earlier I mentioned on the
Editor's Blog that TrailBlazer had uncovered
some denial rates on established E/M services that so staggeringly high that some consultants voiced concerns about the carrier being too strict. Seeing as how established E/Ms are staple services for primary care practices and plenty of specialties, I wrote a
Part B News story about combating the errors TrailBlazer claimed to be seeing en masse across its sample of 200 randomly chosen claims across six states.
That story is now up as part of the
March 7, 2011 issue of
Part B News.
You can read it right now! Quick tip -- the answers include fighting back vigorously when you think your providers were right about E/M levels -- and have the notes to back it up.
What's interesting is that several sources, including a seasoned coder and the practice manager of an allergy/immunology practice within TrailBlazer's jurisdiction, all felt that this particular carrier holds E/M services to a higher documentation standard than most. What's your experience with TrailBlazer been? Feel free to leave a comment.