Knowledge Base Article

I am so excited about this, that I have to mention it. Cooler weather has finally made its way to the deep South. Now granted, at the time of the writing of this article, this means mid-80’s, but anything beats the sweltering heat of the last few weeks with record-setting temperatures in September and October. In fact, September was the hottest September ever. As the weather cools, so does the temperature of lakes, rivers, the ocean in coastal regions, and even backyard pools. If you plan to go for a swim at this time of year, it is a good idea to test the waters first so you will be prepared for that chilly plunge. Evidently, some Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) are “testing the waters” before announcing their Targeted Probe and Educate (TPE) issues. For example, Palmetto GBA, the MAC for Jurisdictions J and M, finally added the topic of DRG 460, Spinal Fusion, to their list of TPE Active Medical Reviews in September although providers in these jurisdictions have been receiving letters for months with the following wording:

“Your organization was selected for review based on Internal Data Analytics. A prepayment review has been initiated to probe a sample of your claims billed with the following DRG 460 code(s): DRG 460 – Spinal Fusion except Cervical without MCC”

One of the major concerns with spinal fusion surgery is that it is not always effective. From the Mayo Clinic website, “Spinal fusion is typically an effective treatment for fractures, deformities or instability in the spine. But study results are more mixed when the cause of the back or neck pain is unclear. In many cases, spinal fusion is no more effective than nonsurgical treatments for nonspecific back pain.” This puts a greater burden on providers in selection of this treatment option and the documentation requirements from Medicare to support this service. The Palmetto Spinal Fusion LCD includes a requirement for, where possible, a documented shared decision making with the patient or patient rep “with the appropriate discussion of anticipated risks and benefits of the procedure.”

The questionable efficacy of spinal fusion over nonsurgical treatments for certain indications also causes Medicare to require conservative treatments be tried and failed or contraindicated before moving on to surgery. Again, from the Palmetto LCD – “The medical record must clearly reflect which conservative treatments the patient has tried or is not a candidate for and why, including medical therapies, physical and exercise therapies and injections.” The problem here for hospital providers is that this information is generally located in the physician’s office record and not always addressed in detail in the hospital H&P. Palmetto also released an article earlier this year that discussed claim denial reasons – “By far the most common reason for denial has been a lack of specific information about conservative care before the surgical intervention. Statements such as: ‘Failed outpatient therapy, admit for spinal fusion’ are simply not sufficient evidence of medical necessity for the admission or the surgery.” The Palmetto article includes suggestions for hospitals and physicians to ensure documentation is complete.

• Hospitals may want to proactively obtain the necessary documentation from the physician office record, radiologic results, therapy treatment notes, therapeutic procedures and other documentation supporting the medical necessity of the surgery. If this documentation is not made part of the hospital record at the time of admission, be sure to have processes in place to gather this information before responding to a data request for records from a Medicare contractor.
• “Practitioners should either create clinically meaningful inpatient records or supply the hospital with relevant documents from their outpatient records.”

Pulling from the Palmetto article and the LCD referenced above, here is a list of the elements that should be included in your documentation.

• History of illness from onset to decision for surgery
• Such as H&P from physician’s office notes, progress notes, documentation of progression of condition
• Prior courses of treatment and results
• Such as previous non-surgical treatment, including, but not limited to physical and/or occupational therapy, joint injections, analgesics, and assistive devices
• Current symptoms and functional limitations
• Such as neurological deficits, upper or lower extremity strength, activity limitations and modification, and pain levels
• Physical exam detailing objective findings supporting history of illness
• Such as patient history and physical exam
• Results of special tests
• Such as diagnostic test results and interpretations, such as MRI

• Shared decision-making
• Such as a physician office note detailing the physician’s discussion with the patient about the risks and benefits of the surgery and documenting the patient’s decision to proceed

MMP reached out to Palmetto to see if there were any additional requirements for the shared decision-making. Palmetto responded that, “It is generally accepted in medicine that patients should be educated about any procedure they are undergoing, and that the patients should provide informed consent for the procedure. Our expectation would be that this general requirement be met for lumbar spinal fusion as it would be met for other invasive procedures.”

Hospital providers may want to “test the waters” themselves by proactively reviewing their own records to see if the documentation is sufficient to support the medical necessity and other requirements of an admission for spinal fusion surgery. First, educate yourself on the requirements by reviewing your MAC’s LCD and coverage articles and any other education resources from your MAC for documentation tips and suggestions. If you need more information, check out the websites of other MACs and look for articles on-line – just be careful that your sources are credible. Secondly, perform some reviews of records to determine if all the necessary documentation is present. These reviews can be done by internal staff (maybe Compliance) or by a trusted external consultant. Finally, if shortcomings are identified in the reviews, institute processes and procedures and educate those involved on what is needed for complete and compliant documentation.