EHRs and E/M Coding: Warnings, Pitfalls, and Best Practices

By Michael Stearns, MD, CPC, CFPC

Take the time to thoroughly understand and customize your EHR. Most electronic health record (EHR) systems include software to help providers determine the appropriate evaluation and management (E/M) CPT® codes for patient encounters. Used correctly, these tools do support accurate coding based on medical necessity, and have been associated with generally higher levels of E/M coding. However, when I recently evaluated a number of EHR products’ E/M coding capabilities, I found significant EHR software design flaws, inadequate implementations, and a general lack of user knowledge regarding how the E/M coding systems function.

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) is concerned about EHRs “assisting” providers with coding and documentation decisions, but there has been little external testing of how EHRs capture and use information to recommend E/M codes. The findings in this article will help you better understand the limitations of EHR based computer-assisted E/M Coding (CAEMC). The evaluations were performed in provider settings. The reviewed EHRs had a reported combined client base of more than 80,000 physicians, which makes these findings partially representative of the overall EHR user population. Each EHR evaluated took a markedly different approach as to how it captured, calculated, and displayed information relevant to E/M coding.

EHR Evaluation Shows E/M Level Discrepancies

All of the evaluated EHRs included features that supported (at least, partially) accurate E/M coding; but all had discrepancies that could cause inaccurate coding. In most healthcare settings, the physician is responsible for choosing the code, which places the liability for incorrect coding solely on the provider’s shoulders. To avoid denials, rejections, penalties, and even accusations of fraud, providers and coding professionals should understand how EHRs are designed, and their limitations. One consistent trend was the EHRs’ inability to automatically identify key data elements related to the complexity of medical decision making (e.g., a provider documented that he or she reviewed images). This suggests that, in general, EHRs are not capturing key encounter information necessary to support accurate CAEMC.

Providers often rely on EHRs to guide their coding-related documentation. A system’s inability to document key E/M-related information in a structured format has the propensity to lead to errors in documentation and suggested E/M codes that are below what should have been reported, resulting in lost revenue. In other instances, EHRs generated higher-level E/M codes than what were supported by documentation, primarily through the inclusion of irrelevant information (by default) or sections of the record that were inappropriately “cloned” (i.e., copied from previous records and pasted into the current document). All the EHRs reviewed supported the ability to clone information from other areas of record, but none gave any warnings that a section of the record was copied and might contain inaccurate information. Auditors are now using anti-plagiarism software and other methods to detect EHR record cloning, and EHRs will need to provide more sophisticated tools to ensure cloned and templated information is accurate and modified appropriately.

Commonly, EHR users were unfamiliar with coding guidelines, and how EHR coding tools could be used proficiently. With one exception, the vendor documentation available to the users during this evaluation was nearly devoid of information necessary to use the coding tools with any degree of sophistication.

The Most Common EHR Issues

CAEMC errors were organized into categories. Although the features of each EHR system varied, the following issues were identified in the majority of the EHRs:

  • Programming errors
    • Inaccurate levels of service calculation (E/M codes) based on information documented in the record.
    • Inaccurate and misleading representation of coding-related terminology and concepts, despite a stated adherence to published Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) guidelines.
  • Usability issues
    • Difficult to use, complicated EHR tools for selecting the correct E/M code during patient care.
    • Highly complex software applications made it challenging for users to modify how E/M coding information is recognized and managed by the EHR. For example, it was difficult for users to create content and set system defaults relevant to E/M coding.
  • Education and training issues
    • Inadequate staff training for best coding practices when using their particular EHR.
    • Lack of supporting documentation explaining how the systems determine E/M codes, further compounding the previous issue.
    • User unfamiliarity of E/M coding guidelines
  • Missing design and feature issues (only selected examples are listed):
    • Discrepancies between how the system determined E/M codes and what is required in CMS’s 1995 and 1997 Documentation Guidelines for Evaluation and Management Services revealed errors in EHR coding tools related to:
      • Inability to recognize and correctly process the data elements of the physical examination (e.g., systems, bullets, areas, etc.).
      • Inability to recognize key elements of the history (e.g.,history of present illness (HPI), past medical, social and family history, and review of systems (ROS)) that are used to determine the overall level of service for the encounter (i.e., the E/M code).
      • Deficiencies in how the number of diagnoses (and their statuses), the level of risk, and the amount of information are used to determine the overall level of complexity for the encounter.
      • Deficiencies in how the three levels of the encounter (i.e., history, examination, and complexity) are used to determine the final E/M code.
      • The inability to recognize documentation conflicts in the record (e.g., when information in the HPI is in direct conflict with information in the ROS section of the note).
      • The inability to recognize when cloned information contains obvious errors of documentation

Work-arounds and Best Practices

Despite the challenges associated with EHR design and use, if implemented and used properly the systems have the potential to improve coding accuracy. Some practices have seen remarkable improvements in their documentation and coding, but only after they took the time to thoroughly understand the inner workings and customization of their EHR. This more accurate coding has led some practices to see increases in revenue in excess of $60,000 per provider, per year.

The majority of EHR users, however, have not invested the time necessary to optimize their EHR’s billing elements. They tend to rely on the EHR’s suggested E/M code and assume the EHR vendor’s tools will protect them from coding at a level not supported by documentation, or by medical necessity. They, too, may see compensation increases, but these increases are associated with coding errors induced by poor EHR usage and design, which puts providers at significant risk for negative consequences. In general, providers need to have greater knowledge of basic E/M requirements and how their EHR interprets and supports these requirements.

The following steps are recommended for EHR users:

  • Begin by reviewing relevant E/M coding user documentation provided by your EHR vendor. Include the actual E/M coding modules as well as default settings and content modifications that influence how relevant E/M data elements are entered into the clinical record. Unfortunately, your EHR may not have documentation at the required level to fully understand how E/M codes are determined.
  • Getting help from a knowledgeable vendor representative or having your system assessed by an independent third party may be necessary.
  • Review the basic elements of your EHR’s E/M coding, including which data elements in the history, physical examination, studies reviewed, assessment, and plan of the record have E/M relevance in both the 1995 and 1997 guidelines. For many providers, becoming familiar with E/M coding requirements published by individual payers may also be necessary. Learning and memorizing this level of detail is very challenging for most providers, but when it’s learned while receiving feedback from the EHR, providers become more sophisticated with E/M coding concepts.
  • The most challenging step is to identify areas of deficiency in the E/M coding tool so potential pitfalls can be avoided by users. A common example of this is the EHR’s tendency to add irrelevant information into the clinical record through templates or default information.

Providers and their coding professional advisors must be certain that superfluous information (e.g., a 12-system ROS and/or irrelevant family history information in an uncomplicated follow-up visit or non-relevant diagnoses in the assessment section of the note) do not appear in the encounter note. Such detail may be seen as not medically necessary, and may trigger the CAEMC tools within an EHR to suggest a higher-than-justified coding level. EHRs tend to “dump” noncontributory information into clinical encounter documents, and auditors learning how EHRs may cause coding errors. Providers must determine which information is medically relevant to document, and either change the default setting in the EHR, or make sure that the EHR’s coding tools do not use this extraneous information to make the final E/M coding recommendation. Providers must also be vigilant when reviewing information that has been cloned from another encounter note. This information needs to be updated, and made specific and relevant for the current patient encounter.

Empower Through Education

Most providers in the United States are relatively new to using EHRs and, in particular, to how EHRs influence or support their coding behavior. Further study of EHR systems and how they are used in “live” settings, and of EHR vendors, is ongoing. EHR CAEMC tools have not been subjected to a certification process. This may need to be considered as a future direction. The majority of EHR users need to acquire a much deeper understanding of how EHRs determine E/M codes. Because each EHR system is unique, users must become familiar with the nuances and shortcomings of their particular EHR system. This knowledge will empower providers to customize and use their EHRs to support accurate E/M coding.

 

Author: Michael Stearns, MD, CPC, CFPC, works as a healthcare compliance and health information technology consultant. He has over 12 years of experience designing and implementing EHRs, and has created requirements for computer-assisted coding software applications for three major health information technology companies. Stearns is a member of the Austin, Texas local chapter. For more information, please send us a message at info@hcit.consulting .

Why Urgent Cares are the best thing since sliced bread

Why Urgent Cares are the best thing since sliced bread

There are more than 9300 Urgent Care centers in the US, and that number is expanding at a substantial rate. Insurers and consumers alike are enjoying the value-based services provided in one convenient Urgent Care location, leading to unprecedented rapid growth within this health segment. Simply put, people are figuring out that Urgent Care clinics offer more flexibility, prompt attention and medical services than a visit to the doctor or ER. Here’s why…

 

They have appointments and hours when your primary care doctor does not

With a growing shortage of primary care physicians, it’s not surprising that scheduling a timely, convenient appointment with your family doctor can be difficult. Enter the Urgent Care center! Your local Urgent Care clinic is likely to be open far later into the evening and on both weekend days, in addition to offering walk-in appointments. When you have an illness that is not quite an emergency, but calls for a medical consult or a prescription that may help you get through the night, Urgent Care centers have the edge in keeping you on top of your health needs with their extended hours and availability. (However, you will still want to visit your doctor for managing your chronic conditions such as high blood pressure and diabetes.) Urgent Care centers are working carefully to collaborate with primary care physicians to keep them apprised of medical treatment provided at the clinic.

 

Your Urgent Care visit will cost less than a typical ER visit

Studies show that Urgent Care services are at least a quarter the cost of an ER visit. Most insurance companies, lured by the lower costs, are rewarding patients who visit Urgent Cares over ERs with far lower copays. In addition, as many as 25% of all visits to the ER could have been served equally or better at an Urgent Care center to start with. Since people are paying increasingly higher premiums for their health plans, an Urgent Care clinic can be enticing with its convenience and lower costs when compared to a higher Emergency Room bill.

 

 

Your wait times are much shorter than in an Emergency room

In an Emergency Department, trauma or cardiac arrest patients will definitely be seen ahead of your sprained ankle, but in an Urgent care, you’re not going up against people with life-threatening emergencies. Your wait time will be short in an Urgent Care clinic, in many cases less than 20 minutes! Shorter wait times equal happy customers and money savings all around. Even hospitals have an interest in having their own Urgent Care centers to keep people with minor injuries out of the ER, treat them in a lower cost setting, and decrease the load on busy emergency departments. If you are in doubt, life-threatening emergencies such as significant trauma, chest pain or severe abdominal pain should always be treated in an emergency room.

 

Urgent Cares cater to most of your health needs

Think of them as an ideal blend between your family doctor and an ER. They can perform many of the types of services you expect at an ER, yet also provide more than your average primary care office. Typically, Urgent Cares treat sprains, colds, infections and cuts. However they are also able to do x-rays and set broken bones, provide vaccinations and perform physicals. Some even have pharmacies on site. Most of the doctors and nurses you will encounter in an Urgent Care clinic specialize in Family Medicine, just like your regular doctor, but at least 30% are trained in Emergency Medicine. With the massive growth in this sector, Urgent Care Medicine is a rising specialty amongst young physicians.

 

Urgent Care centers offer Imaging and Lab services in one convenient location

Need an x-ray to check if your ankle is broken or just sprained? Heading over to your local Urgent Care clinic is your best option for fast service and treatment. Over 90% of Urgent Cares offer a variety of imaging and lab services. If you need blood testing or urinalysis completed for an illness, drug screen or pregnancy or you need a rapid strep assay, it’s readily available at your Urgent Care center.

 

 

 

They’re there for you when you need to get a physical completed ASAP

Whether it is for pre-employment or your current job, for sports, camps or school, your Urgent Care center can perform a medical examination and complete all the necessary paperwork for you. Over 90% of Urgent Cares offer Occupational Medicine services, which may include physical exams, treating work-related injuries and performing the necessary follow-up. In addition, some Urgent Cares do DOT physicals for commercial drivers’ licenses and perform medical exams for immigration.

 

Urgent Care clinics are beginning to offer their own specialties

Some Urgent Cares clinics are expanding their current services to accommodate developing consumer demand as people seek out more value and convenience for their medical needs. Some are expanding their services to include such specialties as cardiology and chronic wound care. In most cases, they are examining the specific needs of their local community in developing such programs.

Author Bio:

 

Jack Roberts is an expert marketer who specializes in promoting and growing physician practices. He currently works with UrgentWay walk-in clinic to help improve their online footprint and garner interest in their Urgent Care, Occupational Health and Health services.

Five Ways to Improve Your RCM Process in the First Few Months of ICD-10

ICD-10 is here in full force, and many providers are already feeling the effects. Slowdowns and the anticipation of the first round of claims denials have many providers biting their nails hoping that they can somehow come back up to speed.
While a rocky ICD-10 implementation transition should be expected as your organization irons out the kinks, there are still many strategies you can employ to eliminate pain points, avoid claims denials and speed up your RCM processes in general. Here are a few suggestions that can revamp your RCM efforts and improve reimbursements overall:

1. Invest in Training
The coding procedures of ICD-10 are much more complex and intensive than the legacy ICD-9 system before it. While there were around 13,000 codes in ICD-9, ICD-10 has 68,000. Merely trying to translate ICD-9 to ICD-10 simply will not work because of the incredible new levels of nuance and complexity afforded by the ICD-10 coding system.

Train everyone in RCM on the ICD-10 procedures for claims, appeals and obtaining guidance from the CMS. Every employee should have at least cursory knowledge of the general theory and practice behind ICD-10 coding, and senior staff must have a definitive working knowledge of the coding procedures. With these knowledge leaders in place, your RCM staff can have someone to consult when they get confused about what they need to do next rather than throwing up their arms in frustration.

 

2. Appoint New Positions
One of the best ways to streamline RCM may seem like it adds more blockage to the workflow, but in the end it will help reduce setbacks that keep claims in billing for too many days or have reimbursement requests denied repeatedly.

Namely: hiring or appointing new staff positions. Having someone audit all claims before they are submitted helps ensure a lower incidence of denial. Having another person or group of people handle every denied claim and enact a dedicated appeals procedure helps prevent taking work power away from filing incoming claims from billing. The team that handles denied claims can also inform training processes down the road so that common mistakes are addressed.

 

3. Optimize Your Front Office with Automation
Many front offices are structured with redundancies or out-of-date practices that hinder efficiency. For example, many offices have manual processes that bog down claims submissions while causing newly-admitted patient accounts to become piled up behind them.

Developing some sort of automation for multiple stages of the billing cycle has been a popular solution to this problem. In the words of the Becker’s ASC Review: “Automating eligibility verification and patient cost estimation processes are two front-end improvements that can increase and accelerate revenue in two ways. First, it will decrease claims errors, thus ensuring you’ll have fewer denials and rejections. Second, it will enable staff to generate fast, accurate estimates, which will not only improve productivity, but will also increase patient collections by facilitating payment at point of care.”

 

4. Restructure Your Workflow
Like a tiny, one-story home that has achieved monstrous size with pieced-together additions and outbuildings, adding on new procedures to your existing RCM practices can make them unwieldy and not fit-for-purpose.

Evaluate your current front office and RCM procedure to map out how typical workflow occurs for Medicare patients, private insurance patients and self-pay patients alike. See if you can redraw that structure to be a more streamlined workflow that facilitates modern billing and claims request procedures rather than working at cross-odds with them.

 

5. Test Continually
You will need to periodically evaluate your RCM systems and procedures to ensure that everything is occurring optimally. The CMS and many payer systems recommended testing before ICD-10, but there is no reason to stop now.

Give your system a periodic “health checkup” that can highlight problem areas that are not so evident during day-to-day operations. Submit sample claims, audit them for correct coding and submission requirements and make recommendations based on problematic trends you identify.

 

Following these tips may require some up-front investment, but they will help providers avoid crippling claims denials or workflow interruptions in the long run. All a healthcare organization can really do in this situation is put more measures in place that prevent mistakes from happening while learning from the mistakes that still do happen. In the end, we will all get through ICD-10 one day at a time.

There are many strategies you can employ to eliminate pain points, avoid claims denials and speed up your RCM processes during the ICD-10 transition.

Author Bio:
Alex Tate is a digital marketing specialist, content strategist, and a health IT Consultant at CureMD who provides perceptive, engaging and informative content on industry wide topics including EHR, EMR, practice management and compliance.  http://www.curemd.com/revenue-cycle-management

 

Population Bodies and Chronic Diseases

How Terminal Illnesses Are Affecting Developing and Developed Nations

According to cdc.gov, in the year 2013, over 2.5 million Americans died at a death rate of 821.5 deaths per 100,000 population. Among the other interesting statistics that litter the webpage, one of the more interesting is the number of deaths per leading causes of death. The number one, two, and three spots are claimed by, respectively, heart disease, cancer, and chronic lower respiratory diseases. All three of these chronic illnesses combined claimed a total of 1.35 million lives.

Despite the United States’ low mortality rates and above-average life expectancy of about eighty years, in comparison to other nations around the world, the nation is still a generally good example of what chronic disease can do to a developed country that is having increasing difficulty in solving its own financial crises. On the opposite end of the spectrum, over with developing and underdeveloped countries, the statistics are not as mild. In another statistic that the World Health Organization published, eighty per cent of deaths caused by chronic diseases occur in low and middle income nations, half of which are in women. In a similar statistic, in the year 2005, chronic diseases alone claimed a peaking number of thirty-five million global lives.

As is probably evident, it would not be difficult to talk about and discuss the ambiguities and general stats that are available about chronic diseases and how they’re cluttering vulnerable, global populations. But the foundation of a more interesting and revealing discussion would not lie in what everybody already knows and widely accepts; it would lie in what everyone does not know, or is least aware of, and an example of such a foundation would be the reasons and primary causes for these chronic and noncommunicable diseases that sprout not during old or even middle age years, but during youth.

The World Health Organization has done a lot in the past to try and communicate this idea, and has stated that the four, primary risk factors for these terminal illnesses are tobacco, alcohol, lack of exercise, and poor nutrition. Excessive involvement in the two substances or association with the two malnourishments at early ages set the stage for chronic illness later in life. This is a scene most commonly found in undeveloped, underdeveloped, or still developing countries with middle to low income and poor qualities of life. When an ever-growing number of these nations’ youths has to resort to other, less favorable means of care and income, such as drugs and other methods of trafficking and substance abuse, it foreshadows the inevitable increase on more World Health Organization documents of chronic disease statistics and deaths in the years to come.

There are, however, equally important statistics other than death rates that must be understood in order to fully comprehend the issue of disease in middle and low income countries. According to an article published on prb.org, one such statistic that is quite salient is the age at which noncommunicable diseases strike. Poorer countries, such as some found in Sub-Saharan Africa, experience more frequent strikes of noncommunicable diseases at younger ages, whereas richer countries inhabit the opposite. A supporting factor of the former is the tobacco industry’s targeting of its campaigns to new smokers in developing regions, most certainly aiding in their economic growth while depressingly and simultaneously increasing the percentage of young smokers and tobacco users, all contributing to the larger, looming picture that is chronic disease.

With all of this circulation and attention that our world’s epidemics and Medicare problems are receiving, the time has well passed now where people had to start looking for viable solutions. Among the other options available, one such option is improving how we do population health management. By aggregating patient data across a multitude of health information technology resources in order to better understand how groups and populations of people are developing sickness patterns and other common causes that contribute to high mortality rates, it’s far easier to achieve successful insights and results. “Technological Innovations in health IT and the fast approaching implementation of ICD-10 will permit sharing of data at the international level which would not only allow better patient diagnosis but also help in identifying various epidemics at an early stage”. – Bilal Hasmat, CEO CureMD

Improved population health management can also be beneficial in producing more cost-effective and dollar-saving ways of treatment, especially in countries that have healthcare systems designed for treating the short-term instead of the long-term, such as that found in the United States.

For example, forahealthieramerica.com says that, in the U.S., heart diseases and strokes, two leading causes of death, drive healthcare costs at a damaging rate of $432 billion per year. Chronic disease treatment is at a minimal and plays a very large part in the healthcare crisis the nation still faces today, alongside obesity and diabetes. Healthcare improvements have to be made before any progress can, and this is addressing one of the most developed nations in the world. Imagine the conflicts that developing and underdeveloped nations are being forced to struggle with.

Another overriding difficulty that Americans specifically face are, as touched on above, rising healthcare costs. Twenty-five per cent of Americans with chronic diseases face some sort of activity limitation, as mentioned on the same website, which may include being restricted from or needing help with personal tasks, like bathing and getting dressed, and may even prevent them from attending school and or work altogether. A disabled American who cannot provide for him or herself financially or physically could not have it worse. This specific scenario supports the growing need for population health management and overall healthcare improvements in just the United States alone.

The many attributes and factors that make up the worldwide issue of controlling chronic disease, such as the financial cost, the work needed, and the human cost itself, cannot be passed or shoved along to someone else to fix. It’s an issue that everyone is facing, in one way or another, and an issue that everyone has to take some part in solving. No matter how it’s done or the motivations behind it, it’s time to stop focusing on what we want to be done, and time to start focusing on the more prevalent issues that must be taken care of.

 

Author Bio

Daniel Schwartz is a content strategist who sheds light on various engaging and informative topics related to the health IT industry. His belief in technology, compliance and cost reduction have opened new horizons for people in the health care industry. He is passionate about topics such as Affordable Care Act, EHR, revenue cycle management, and privacy and security of patient health data. He can be contacted at daniel.schwartz@curemd.com

Top Population Health Management Software

Top Population Health Management Software

Population health management is an essential aspect of today’s healthcare provider environment. Solutions for population health management have become increasingly essential for medical practitioners in all aspects of their business. Why?

Use of population health management software:

  •  encourages interaction between patient and provider
  • manages high risk patients
  • analyzes and utilizes the most efficient and effective evidence-based protocols to treat and diagnose patients in the most cost-effective manner

The emphasis in healthcare today, mainly due to the Affordable Care Act, is in shifting from quantity to quality, or from volume to value, in regard to patient care. Physicians and healthcare providers focusing on high-quality patient-centered care is the goal. However this is not as easy as it sounds.

When it comes to looking for PHM solutions, what should you look for?

What to look for in PHM solutions

High-quality population health management software enables healthcare providers to automate communication, reporting, data integration, and analysis in all aspects of patient care and delivery. An effective system identifies gaps in care, oversees managed care, and provides greater analysis of measurement outcomes. Major benefits of optimal population health management systems:

  • Coordinate care among multidisciplinary teams and settingsCreate an organized system of care
  • Improve and enhance access to primary care scenarios
  • Centralize resource planning
  • Provide greater utilization and access to data and reporting for improved communication between patients and providers as well as between healthcare providers

 

Such a system makes management easier through:

  • Data collection, management, and storage
  • Optimizing health in any given population
  • Monitoring
  • Patient-focused care and interaction
  • Optimal outcome measurements
  • A focus on team-based strategies and interventions

Population health management software should cover a variety of products, services and accessibility when it comes to quality, risk management, operations, document training and control, and health and safety based on environment and operations. Document control and planning cannot be underestimated in today’s reimbursement atmosphere to ensure compliance, increase efficiency, and reduce review and approval time.

Look for software systems that can be utilized across a wide platform of specialties and that are HIPAA compliant. A number of popular systems today include:

  • CureMD ICE
  • eClinicalWorks
  • NueMD
  • Practice Fusion
  • ADP AdvancedMD

Software Insider[1] provides detailed information regarding over a dozen popular EHR and PHM systems today. Comparisons should be made regarding desired platforms, features, accessibility, clinical practice and specialty, and intended use, such as private practice or hospital use.

 

How do a few of the most popular PHM systems compare?

Several of the most popular and highly rated software systems in this aspect of health care include offer a variety of solutions and main features

 

Solutions:

EMR Medical Billing Practice Management Patient Scheduling
CureMD yes yes yes yes
eClinicalWorks yes no no no
Practice Fusion yes yes yes yes

 

Main Features:

CureMD eClinicalWorks Practice Fusion
  • Credit card processingü  API options
  •  Document management
  • Patient Portal
  • Reporting dashboard
  • E-Prescribing
  • Electronic remittance advice
  •  Credit card processing
  • Claim scrubber
  • E-Prescribing
  • Electronic remittance advice
  • Patient portal
  • Document management
  • E-Prescribing
  • Lab orders and results
  • Online booking
  • Patient portal

 

Specs:

CureMD eClinicalWorks Practice Fusion
Platform
  • Online
  • Online
  • Mobile
  • Online
  • Mobile
  • On premise
Mobile platforms
  • iOS
  • Mobile website
  • Android
  • iOS

Data: Office of National Coordinator for Health IT and Software Vendor Sites

 

Importance of population health management important in today’s healthcare economy

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 encourages responsibility of healthcare providers in regard to not only quality of care, but the cost of that care. An increased demand in measuring value of care and payment is required.

A good system helps medical providers provide optimal care in a variety of environments. Companies providing such platforms and solutions are invaluable in maintaining accuracy and optimal reimbursement in a timely manner. Due diligence is key in researching and selecting the PHM software system that works best for sole practitioners to hospital environments.

 

Author bio: Nina Keller Health IT expert for HCIT Consulting. Writes frequently about ICD10 , EHR ,HIPAA Medical Billing and health care reforms.