Pre-Payment Review Results for Surgical Debridement for January to March 2025
Pre-Payment Review Results for Surgical Debridement for Targeted Probe and Educate (TPE) for January to March 2025
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) implemented the TPE process for Current Procedural Terminology® (CPT®) codes 11042–11047 for Surgical Debridement. The reviews with edit effectiveness are presented here for Alabama, Georgia and Tennessee.
Cumulative Results
| Number of Providers with Edit Effectiveness | Providers Compliant Completed/Removed After Probe | Providers Non-Compliant Progressing to Subsequent Probe | Providers Non-Compliant/Removed for Other Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| 46 | 28 | 18 | 0 |
| Number of Claims with Edit Effectiveness | Number of Claims Denied | Overall Claim Denial Rate | Total Dollars Reviewed | Total Dollars Denied | Overall Charge Denial Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 914 | 268 | 29% | $96,086.46 | $26,928.75 | 28% |
Probe One Findings
| State | Number of Providers with Edit Effectiveness | Providers Compliant Completed/Removed After Probe | Providers Non-Compliant Progressing to Subsequent Probe | Providers Non-Compliant/Removed for Other Reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ala. | 13 | 10 | 3 | 0 |
| Ga. | 15 | 9 | 6 | 0 |
| Tenn. | 18 | 9 | 9 | 0 |
| State | Number of Claims with Edit Effectiveness | Number of Claims Denied | Overall Claim Denial Rate | Total Dollars Reviewed | Total Dollars Denied | Overall Charge Denial Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ala. | 260 | 60 | 23% | $27,886.60 | $4,442.35 | 16% |
| Ga. | 297 | 65 | 22% | $33,531.50 | $6,971.35 | 21% |
| Tenn. | 357 | 143 | 40% | $34,668.36 | $15,515.05 | 45% |
Risk Category
The risk categories for CPT® codes 11042–11047 for Surgical Debridement are defined as:
| Risk Category | Error Rate |
|---|---|
| Minor | 0–20% |
| Major | 21–100% |
Figure 1. Risk Category for Surgical Debridement CPT® Codes 11042–11047.
Top Denial Reasons
| Percent of Total Denials | Denial Code | Denial Description | Number of Occurrences |
|---|---|---|---|
| 70% | NODOC | Documentation Requested for this Date of Service Was Not Received or Was Incomplete; Therefore We Are Unable to Make a Reasonable and Necessary Determination as Defined Under Section 1862(a) (1) (A) of the ACT for the Service Billed, and this Service Has Been Denied | 23 |
| 18% | NOTMN | Payer Deems the Information Submitted Does Not Support the Medical Necessity of the Services Billed | 6 |
| 6% | WRONG | Documentation Received Contains an Incorrect, Incomplete or Illegible Patient Identification or Date of Service | 2 |
| 3% | BILER | Claim Billed in Error per Provider | 1 |
| 3% | NOSIG | Documentation Lacks the Necessary Provider's Signature | 1 |
Denial Reasons and Recommendations
NODOC — Documentation Requested for this Date of Service Was Not Received or Was Incomplete; Therefore We Are Unable to Make a Reasonable and Necessary Determination as Defined Under Section 1862(a) (1) (A) of the ACT for the Service Billed, and this Service Has Been Denied
- Submit all documentation related to the services billed within 45 days of the date on the Additional Documentation Request (ADR) letter
- Review documentation prior to submission to ensure that the documentation is complete and that all dates of service requested are included
- Include any additional information pertinent to the date of service requested to support the services billed. For example: original chart notes, diagnostic, radiological or laboratory results.
- For claims denied with a M127 or N29 code listed on the remittance advice, be sure to submit all documentation for all dates of service on that claim with a reopen/redetermination request form by fax to JM Part B (803) 699–2427, JJ Part B (803) 870–0139, or Railroad Beneficiaries Appeals (803) 462–2218.
NOTMN — Payer Deems the Information Submitted Does Not Support the Medical Necessity of the Services Billed
- Ensure that all documentation to support medical necessity of the service billed is submitted for review. This includes original chart notes and any diagnostic, radiological or laboratory results.
- Verify that documentation to support the level of service billed is included. Please refer to Palmetto GBA's LCD, NCD and the Evaluation and Management (E/M) Scoresheet Tool for documentation requirements.
WRONG — Documentation Received Contains an Incorrect, Incomplete or Illegible Patient Identification or Date of Service
- Review all documentation prior to submission to ensure that it is for the correct patient and date of service
- Ensure that patient identifiers are legible and complete
- Ensure that the complete date of service is clearly and legibly noted on all documentation
- Prior to billing claims, review the information to determine that the correct patient identifier and the correct date of service are listed in the appropriate field
BILER — Claim Billed in Error per Provider
- Prior to billing claims, review the information to determine that the correct information is listed in the appropriate fields
- For all claims previously billed and denied by medical review, do not resubmit the claims. If you disagree with the decision from medical review, you must submit the appropriate documentation with a completed redetermination request form to the appeals department. This information can be sent by fax to JMB Appeals (803) 699–2427, JJB Appeals (803) 870–0139, or RRB Appeals (803) 462–2218.
- If documentation indicates that both a nonphysician practitioner (NPP) and a physician performed the service, and the claim is billed under the physician’s National Provider Identifier (NPI), the billing physician must sign the record. Additionally, the documentation must include a statement that the billing provider had face-to-face contact with the patient and performed a substantive portion of the E/M visit. (A substantive portion of the E/M visit includes at least one of the three key components: history, exam, or medical decision-making.)
- If documentation occurs in a teaching environment, review the documentation to ensure that the billing provider has provided a teaching attestation and a signature
NOSIG — Documentation Lacks the Necessary Provider's Signature
- Verify that all documentation is legibly signed by the rendering physician or NPP
- Verify that electronic signature meets the CMS signature requirements as listed in Palmetto GBA's article Medicare Medical Records: Signature Requirements, Acceptable and Unacceptable Practices
- Submit a valid Signature Attestation with any documentation that lacks the rendering provider's signature. Do not resubmit altered documentation with late added provider signature. This will not be accepted by medical review. For an example of a signature attestation, refer to Palmetto GBA's article Medicare Medical Records: Signature Requirements, Acceptable and Unacceptable Practices.
Education
Palmetto GBA offers providers selected for TPE an individualized education session to discuss each claim denial. This is an opportunity to learn how to identify and correct claim errors. A variety of education methods are offered such as webinar sessions, web-based presentations or teleconferences. Other education methods may also be available. Providers do not have to be selected for TPE to request education. If education is desired, please complete the Education Request Form (PDF).
Next Steps
Providers found to be non-compliant (major risk category/denial rate of 21–100 percent) at the completion of TPE Probe 1 will advance to Probe 2, and providers found to be non-compliant (major risk category/denial rate of 21–100 percent) at the completion of TPE Probe 2 will advance to Probe 3 of TPE after at least 45 days from completing the 1:1 post-probe education call date.