Evaluation and Management

As of 1/1/2023, CMS has eliminated prior specifications for the scope of examination and associated documentation in the outpatient office and hospital settings. The provider is expected to perform and document a medically necessary and relevant examination based on the patient’s presenting complaint(s) and/ or known history and on the examiner’s observations of the patient’s condition.

This rule also applies in the emergency department setting. A medically appropriate history and/or examination is a component of emergency department services at levels 99282-99285. Since 99281 does not require the presence of a physician or NPP, there is no history or examination component to 99281.

Examination

  1. Can either history or examination be used to level-set an E/M service.

    Answer:
    Since history and exam elements are now based solely on medical necessity, neither of these may be used independently to level-set a visit. Excluding ED services (which are based solely on MDM), either total time spent or complexity of MDM are used to level-set a visit. For split/shared services in the inpatient setting, work performed and documented relative to performance of history or examination may be contributory, but not used exclusively, in defining the substantive provider.
     
  2. Is a physical exam required documentation for billing an inpatient discharge E/M service (CPT codes 99238/99239)?

    Answer: A physical examination is not a required component of an E/M discharge service (CPTs 99238‒99239), unless indicated by the patient’s clinical status on the date of discharge. The note must reflect a discussion of the hospital stay and plans for post-discharge care, preparation of records and prescriptions and referral forms as necessary.
     
  3. When a patient returns for a follow-up visit for a complaint previously and successfully treated, is that subsequent visit considered to be medically necessary?

    Answer: A follow-up visit may be considered medically necessary, when the provider plans to evaluate effectiveness of prior treatment. The fact that the patient no longer has a complaint does not negate the medical necessity of the visit. Here are two differing examples:
    • A patient previously seen for headaches and found to be hypertensive, with medication prescribed, now returns symptom-free for blood pressure evaluation. This visit would be medically necessary to evaluate the patient’s response to medication.
    • A patient previously seen for a common cold now returns for a follow-up visit with no complaints. Since the original visit was for a self-limiting condition and no medical treatment was initiated, the medical necessity for a follow-up visit is questionable and should be carefully considered.

Reviewed 10/8/2024