Re: Dave Audit

[Nathan]

It makes all the clinical sense in the world, but I don't think it makes as much billing sense. It would be almost inpossible to know when to DC a dx if you left it active until all evidence of the condition was gone. After a bad case of pneumonia, you could have decreased tidal volume for the rest of your life due to scarring. Clinically, you need to be aware of that, but CMS (Medicare) is not going to go on paying after the acute episode is gone. At least not under the dx of pneumonia.   Nathan ----- Original Message ----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2004 10:52 AM Subject: Re: Dave Audit In a message dated 2/15/2004 1:24:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That is like saying someone that had a broken leg 5 years ago, still has a broken leg because they walk with a limp. The after-effects of pneumonia are not an infection and should not be coded that way.   Nathan I guess it's a different way of thinking about it...my argument is that the aftereffects of the infection are obviously secondary to that infection, and therefore per the instructions for I2 are still affecting the resident functional status so the condition is not completely resolved and should be coded.  Does this make sense? RNCATFL