NABCEP CDIP Certified Documentation Integrity Practitioner Exam Practice Test

AHIMA suggests that an organization should consider a physician response rate of 80% and an agreement rate of 80% as benchmarks for CDI program performance. These rates indicate the level of physician engagement and documentation accuracy in relation to CDI queries.

References: AHIMA. “Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice (2019 Update).” Journal of AHIMA 90, no. 2 (February 2019): 20-29.

When there are comparative contrasting diagnoses supported by clinical criteria, the correct action is to code both diagnoses, as long as they are not mutually exclusive. Comparative contrasting diagnoses are those that are considered as possible alternatives or differentials for the patient’s condition, such as pneumonia versus bronchitis, or appendicitis versus diverticulitis. Coding both diagnoses will capture the clinical uncertainty and complexity of the case, and will allow for accurate reporting and reimbursement. References: : https://www.ahima.org/media/owmhxbv1/cdip_contentoutline_2023_final.pdf : https://my.ahima.org/store/product?id=67077

 Severity of illness (SOI) and risk of mortality (ROM) are two metrics that measure the complexity and acuity of a patient’s condition, based on the number, nature, and interaction of complications and comorbidities (CCs) and major CCs (MCCs). SOI reflects the extent of physiologic decompensation or organ system loss of function, while ROM reflects the likelihood of dying. Both SOI and ROM are divided into four levels: minor, moderate, major, or extreme. These metrics are used to adjust payment rates, quality indicators, and performance measures for hospitals and other healthcare providers.

If a CDIP stops reviewing any record after a major CC is found, they may miss other CCs or MCCs that could affect the patient’s SOI and ROM levels. For example, a patient with pneumonia and sepsis would have a major CC (pneumonia) and an MCC (sepsis). If the CDIP stops reviewing the record after finding pneumonia, they would not capture sepsis, which would increase the patient’s SOI and ROM levels from major to extreme. This would result in underreporting the patient’s true complexity and acuity, and potentially lead to lower reimbursement, lower quality scores, and higher denial risk.

Therefore, the unintended consequence of this policy is a decrease in SOI and ROM levels for patients who have more than one CC or MCC.

References:

• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide, 2021 Edition. AHIMA Press. ISBN: 9781584268530
• Q&A: Understanding SOI and ROM in the APR-DRG system
• 3M™ All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups (APR DRGs)
• Severity of illness | definition of severity of illness by Medical dictionary
• Using Severity Adjustment Classification for Hospital Internal and External Comparisons

According to the ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting, when the affected side is not documented for a condition that is commonly associated with hemiplegia or hemiparesis, such as a cerebral vascular accident, the default code is the non-dominant side. The non-dominant side is usually the left side for right-handed individuals and the right side for left-handed individuals. However, if the patient is ambidextrous, the default code is still the non-dominant side, unless the provider indicates otherwise. Therefore, in this case, the default code for cerebral vascular accident with left sided weakness is I63.532 Cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of left middle cerebral artery1.

References:

• CDIP® Exam Content Outline (https://www.ahima.org/media/1z0x0x1a/cdip-exam-content-outline.pdf)
• ICD-10 Code for Cerebral infarction due to unspecified occlusion or stenosis of left middle cerebral artery- I63.532- AAPC Coder1
• ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting FY 2022

facilities must develop an escalation policy for unanswered queries and address any medical staff concerns regarding queries1. If a query does not receive an appropriate professional response, the case should be referred for further review in accordance with the facility’s written escalation policy2. The escalation policy should address when the issue is brought to the physician advisor, the department director, or administration with defined actions as to the responsibilities at each level1. The policies should reflect a method of response that can realistically occur for the organization1. Therefore, reviewing the facility’s query policies and procedures is the best approach to ensure compliance and consistency in handling unanswered queries.

The other options are not advisable because they either involve skipping the escalation policy, notifying the physician advisor/champion without proper review or feedback, contacting the physician repeatedly without respecting their time or availability, or notifying the coding team without resolving the query issue.

The most appropriate action in this case is to query the provider to document the etiology of pneumonia, which is pseudomonas bacteria. This is because the etiology of pneumonia affects the coding and classification of the condition, as well as the severity of illness, risk of mortality, and reimbursement. According to the ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting, pneumonia should be coded by type whenever possible, and if the type of pneumonia is not documented, then the default code is J18.9, Pneumonia, unspecified organism 2. However, if the type of pneumonia is documented, then a more specific code can be assigned, such as J15.1, Pneumonia due to Pseudomonas 3. Therefore, querying the provider to document the etiology of pneumonia will improve the accuracy and completeness of the documentation and coding, and reflect the true clinical picture of the patient.

References: 1: AHIMA CDIP Exam Prep, Fourth Edition, p. 139 4 2: ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting FY 2021, Section I.C.9.a 3: ICD-10-CM Code J15.1 - Pneumonia due to Pseudomonas

When queries are part of the health record, which is recommended by AHIMA and ACDIS, physicians are responsible for responding to queries in a timely manner and ensuring that their documentation is complete and accurate. If a provider receives too many deficiencies due to incomplete records for failure to respond to queries, their admitting privilege could be suspended by the medical staff committee as a disciplinary action.

References: AHIMA/ACDIS. “Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice (2019 Update).” Journal of AHIMA 90, no. 2 (February 2019): 20-29.

The clinical documentation integrity practitioner (CDIP) should interact with the physician to clarify whether or not the pneumonia is a hospital-acquired condition (HAC) by asking the physician to indicate if the pneumonia was present on admission (POA) based on the initial chest x-ray. This is because the POA status of a condition affects its coding, reporting, and reimbursement, and it is the responsibility of the physician to document the POA status of all diagnoses. The CDIP should not assume that the pneumonia developed after admission based on the timing of symptoms or treatment, as this may not reflect the true clinical picture. The CDIP should also not ask the physician about the causal relationship between the acute kidney injury and the pneumonia, as this is not relevant to the POA status. The CDIP should also not avoid querying the physician based on the presence of another MCC, as this may compromise the accuracy and completeness of documentation. (CDIP Exam Preparation Guide)

References:

• CDIP Exam Content Outline
• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide
• Present on Admission Reporting Guidelines

According to the AHIMA/ACDIS Query Practice Brief, whether or not queries should be kept as a permanent part of the medical record is decided by the organizational policy of each facility1. There is no federal or state law that mandates the retention of queries in the medical record, although some external reviewers may request copies of queries to validate the query wording and compliance2. Physician preference is not a valid factor in determining the query retention policy, as queries should be handled consistently across the organization3. Therefore, the correct answer is D. organizational policy. References:

• Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice (2019 Update) - AHIMA
• Q&A: Develop policies regarding query retention | ACDIS
• Q&A: Keep query retention policies consistent | ACDIS

A hospital-acquired condition (HAC) is an undesirable situation or condition that affects a patient and that arose during a stay in a hospital or medical facility. CMS has identified 14 categories of HACs for which it will not pay the higher DRG rate if the condition was not present on admission (POA). One of these categories is stage III and IV pressure ulcers. A pressure ulcer is damage to the skin and underlying tissue caused by prolonged pressure on the skin. Stage III pressure ulcers involve full-thickness skin loss with damage or necrosis of subcutaneous tissue that may extend down to, but not through, underlying fascia. The ulcer presents as a deep crater with or without undermining of adjacent tissue.

A. Iatrogenic pneumothorax with lung biopsy is not a HAC, because it is not included in the CMS HAC list. Iatrogenic pneumothorax is a HAC only when it occurs with venous catheterization.

B. Iatrogenic pneumothorax with venous catheterization is a HAC, but it may be present on admission if the venous catheterization was performed before the admission to the hospital.

C. Pressure ulcer stage II is not a HAC, because only stage III and IV pressure ulcers are included in the CMS HAC list. Stage II pressure ulcers involve partial-thickness skin loss involving epidermis, dermis, or both. The ulcer is superficial and presents clinically as an abrasion, blister, or shallow crater.

References:

• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide, 2021 Edition. AHIMA Press. ISBN: 9781584268530
• Hospital Acquired Conditions | CMS
• ICD-10 HAC List | CMS
• Bedsores (pressure ulcers) - Symptoms and causes - Mayo Clinic

Collaboration between the physician advisor/champion and the clinical documentation integrity practitioners (CDIPs) would likely include educating physicians on the importance and impact of clinical documentation on coding, reimbursement, quality measures, compliance, and patient care. The physician advisor/champion can act as a liaison between the CDIPs and the medical staff, provide feedback and guidance on query development and resolution, and facilitate peer-to-peer education sessions on documentation best practices and standards6 References: 1: https://www.ahima.org/media/owmhxbv1/cdip_contentoutline_2023_final.pdf  6: https://my.ahima.org/store/product?id=67077

According to the AHIMA CDIP Exam Preparation Guide, the adjusted case mix index (CMI) is a measure that demonstrates the relative severity and complexity of patients treated in a hospital, and is used to evaluate the financial impact of a hospital’s clinical documentation integrity (CDI) program1. The adjusted CMI is calculated by multiplying the unadjusted CMI by a factor that accounts for the percentage of Medicare patients in the hospital2. The higher the adjusted CMI, the higher the expected reimbursement per patient, and the more effective the CDI program is assumed to be3. The other options are not correct because they do not measure the severity and complexity of patients or the financial impact of CDI. Hospital acquired conditions (HACs) are conditions that are not present on admission and are considered preventable by CMS, and may result in reduced reimbursement or penalties4. The program for evaluating payment patterns electronic report (PEPPER) is a report that provides hospital-specific data on potential overpayments or underpayments for certain services or diagnoses, and helps identify areas of risk or opportunity for improvement. Present on admission (POA) indicators are codes that indicate whether a condition was present at the time of admission or acquired during the hospital stay, and affect the assignment of DRGs and HACs. References:

• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide - AHIMA
• Demystifying and communicating case-mix index - ACDIS
• What is Case Mix Index? | The Importance of CMI
• Hospital-Acquired Conditions (HACs) | CMS
• [PEPPER Resources]
• [Present on Admission Reporting Guidelines - CMS]

According to the AHIMA/ACDIS Query Practice Brief, one of the scenarios that warrants a query is when there is clinical evidence of a higher degree of specificity or severity1. In this case, the patient’s COPD exacerbation and oxygen therapy may indicate a higher level of respiratory impairment than chronic respiratory failure alone. Therefore, a query to the provider to see if acute on chronic respiratory failure is supported by the health record is appropriate and compliant. Acute on chronic respiratory failure is a more specific and severe diagnosis that may affect the patient’s severity of illness, risk of mortality, and reimbursement2. The other options are not correct because they either assume a diagnosis without querying the provider, or query for a less specific or severe diagnosis than what the clinical indicators suggest. References:

• Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice (2019 Update) - AHIMA
• Q&A: Respiratory failure in a drug overdose | ACDIS

The provider agreement rate is the percentage of queries that result in a change in the documentation or coding that is consistent with the query. It is a measure of the accuracy and appropriateness of the queries, as well as the provider’s acceptance of the CDI program’s recommendations. A high provider agreement rate indicates that the CDI practitioners are asking relevant and compliant queries that improve the quality and specificity of the documentation. The other options are not directly related to the credibility of the queries or the success of the CDI program. The CDI agreement rate is the percentage of queries that agree with the coder’s final DRG assignment. The CDI query rate is the percentage of records that generate a query from the CDI practitioner. The provider response rate is the percentage of queries that receive a response from the provider.

One of the best practices for writing a compliant query is to include all relevant clinical indicators from the health record that support the need for clarification and the query options. Clinical indicators are objective and measurable signs, symptoms, laboratory results, diagnostic test results, medications, treatments, and other documented findings that are related to a specific diagnosis or condition. Including clinical indicators helps to provide the rationale for the query, avoid leading or suggesting a desired response, and ensure that the query is based on evidence and not assumptions. The other options are not best practices for writing a compliant query. Directing the physician to a specific diagnosis is leading and noncompliant. Using the term “possible” to describe a condition or diagnosis when uncertain if the diagnosis is present is vague and imprecise. Using a yes/no query format for specificity of a diagnosis is discouraged, as it limits the provider’s choices and may not capture the true clinical picture.

According to the Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice (2019 Update) - AHIMA1, a query escalation policy should describe how to handle situations in which an answer is not received, an inappropriate answer or comment is provided, etc. The escalation policy should address when the issue is brought to the physician advisor, the department director, or administration with defined actions as to the responsibilities at each level. The policies should reflect a method of response that can realistically occur for the organization1. In this case, since the CDIP has tried multiple methods of communication with the doctor but still gets no response, the CDIP should elevate the issue to the physician advisor/champion, who can facilitate communication and education with the doctor and ensure documentation integrity and compliance1. However, before escalating the issue, the CDIP should consult with the CDI supervisor to review the case and confirm that the query is appropriate, relevant, and compliant with the query guidelines1. This would ensure that the escalation is justified and not based on personal bias or preference.

The other options are not advisable because they either involve skipping the escalation policy, reporting the doctor without proper review or feedback, holding a meeting without involving the physician advisor/champion, or giving up on querying altogether.

References:

• Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice (2019 Update) - AHIMA1

CMI is a metric that reflects the diversity, complexity, and severity of the patients treated at a healthcare facility, such as a hospital. CMI is used by CMS to determine hospital reimbursement rates for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. CMI is calculated by adding up the relative MS-DRG weight for each discharge, and dividing that by the total number of Medicare and Medicaid discharges in a given month and year. Higher CMI values indicate that a hospital has treated a greater number of complex, resource-intensive patients, and the hospital may be reimbursed at a higher rate for those cases.

However, CMI is not the best measure of CDI performance, because it is influenced by many factors beyond CDI efforts, such as patient population, coding accuracy, documentation specificity, patient comorbidities, high volumes of highly weighted DRGs, and annual updates to relative MS-DRG weights. Therefore, measuring CMI over time with a focus on particular documentation improvement areas in addition to the overall CMI can provide a more comprehensive and meaningful assessment of CDI performance. For example, CDI programs can track CMI changes for specific DRGs, clinical conditions, or service lines that are targeted for documentation improvement initiatives. This can help identify the impact of CDI interventions on documentation quality, accuracy, and completeness.

A. Over time with a focus on high relative weight (RW) procedures that impact these procedures on overall CMI. This is not the best way to measure CMI as a metric of CDI performance, because it may not reflect the true complexity and severity of the patients treated at the facility. Focusing only on high RW procedures may overlook other documentation improvement opportunities for lower RW procedures or medical cases that may also affect patient outcomes, quality indicators, and reimbursement.

C. Month-to-month and focus on patient volumes to determine the raise the overall CMI. This is not a valid way to measure CMI as a metric of CDI performance, because patient volumes do not directly affect CMI. CMI is calculated by dividing the total relative weights by the total number of discharges, so increasing patient volumes will not necessarily raise the overall CMI unless the relative weights also increase.

D. Month-to-month to show CMI variability as a barometer of a specific month. This is not a reliable way to measure CMI as a metric of CDI performance, because month-to-month variations in CMI may be due to random fluctuations or seasonal effects that are not related to CDI efforts. Measuring CMI over a longer period of time can provide a more stable and accurate picture of CDI performance.

References:

• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide, 2021 Edition. AHIMA Press. ISBN: 9781584268530
• Case Mix Index (CMI) | Definitive Healthcare
• Q&A: Understanding case mix index | ACDIS

In order to best demonstrate the impact of clinical documentation on severity of illness and risk of mortality, examples from the hospital’s actual cases are the most effective for physicians in a hospital. Examples from the hospital’s actual cases can show how specific documentation elements, such as diagnoses, procedures, complications, comorbidities, and present on admission indicators, can affect the severity of illness and risk of mortality scores of the patients, as well as the hospital’s performance and reputation. Examples from the hospital’s actual cases can also provide feedback and education to the physicians on how to improve their documentation practices and standards. References: : https://www.ahima.org/media/owmhxbv1/cdip_contentoutline_2023_final.pdf : https://my.ahima.org/store/product?id=67077

According to the AHIMA CDIP Exam Preparation Guide, a query is a communication tool or process used to clarify documentation in the health record for documentation integrity and accurate code assignment1. A query should be clear, concise, and consistent, and should include relevant clinical indicators that support the query1. A query should also provide multiple choice answer options that are supported by clinical indicators and include a non-leading query statement2. In this case, the patient presents with signs and symptoms of sepsis, such as fever, tachycardia, tachypnea, hypotension, and elevated white blood count. The patient also has a positive sputum culture for klebsiella pneumoniae, which is the likely source of infection. However, the hospitalist continues to document septicemia due to pneumonia, which is a vague and outdated term that does not reflect the patient’s true severity of illness, risk of mortality, or reimbursement3. Therefore, a query to the hospitalist to clarify the diagnosis of sepsis and its etiology is appropriate and compliant. The diagnosis that implies that a query was sent and answered is B. Sepsis with pneumonia due to klebsiella pneumoniae. This diagnosis is more specific and accurate than septicemia due to pneumonia, as it indicates the type of infection (sepsis), the site of infection (pneumonia), and the causal organism (klebsiella pneumoniae). This diagnosis also affects the assignment of DRGs and quality scores. The other options are not correct because they either do not provide enough specificity ©, or they introduce additional diagnoses that are not supported by the clinical indicators (A and D). References:

• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide - AHIMA
• Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice (2019 Update) - AHIMA
• Q&A: Three query opportunities related to sepsis infections | ACDIS
• [Q&A: Clinical validation of sepsis and clinical criteria | ACDIS]

This query option is the most compliant based on the most recent AHIMA/ACDIS query practice brief because it meets the following criteria:

• It is based on clinical indicators in the health record that support a reasonable and logical connection between the conditions (femur fracture and osteoporosis).
• It is non-leading and non-suggestive, as it does not imply a specific answer or diagnosis, but rather asks for the provider’s opinion based on their clinical judgment.
• It is concise and clear, as it uses simple and direct language that avoids ambiguity or confusion.
• It is relevant and specific, as it addresses a clinical issue that has an impact on patient care, quality reporting, and/or reimbursement.
• It is consistent with clinical documentation integrity (CDI) standards and guidelines, as it follows the AHIMA/ACDIS query practice brief recommendations for query format, content, delivery, and documentation.

References:

• CDIP® Exam Content Outline (https://www.ahima.org/media/1z0x0x1a/cdip-exam-content-outline.pdf)
• CDIP® Exam Preparation Guide (https://my.ahima.org/store/product?id=67077)
• Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice—2022 Update (https://acdis.org/resources/guidelines-achieving-compliant-query-practice%E2%80%942022-update)

When benchmarking with outside organizations, the clinical documentation integrity practitioner (CDIP) must determine if the organization is benchmarking with hospitals that are its peers because peer hospitals have similar characteristics such as size, location, teaching status, case mix index, and payer mix. Benchmarking with peer hospitals allows for a more accurate and meaningful comparison of performance indicators and outcomes. (CDIP Exam Preparation Guide)

References:

• CDIP Exam Content Outline1
• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide2

According to the ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting FY 2023, the principal diagnosis is defined as "the condition established after study to be chiefly responsible for occasioning the admission of the patient to the hospital for care"2. In this case, the patient was admitted with shortness of breath, productive yellow sputum, and a temperature of 101.2, which are signs and symptoms of pneumonia. The CXR confirmed the diagnosis of LLL pneumonia, which is a serious condition that requires inpatient care. Therefore, LLL pneumonia is the principal diagnosis.

The secondary diagnoses are defined as "all conditions that coexist at the time of admission, that develop subsequently, or that affect the treatment received and/or the length of stay"2. In this case, the patient had bilateral pleural effusion and kidney failure at the time of admission, which are coexisting conditions that affect the treatment received and/or the length of stay. The renal consult documented AKI with ATN, which is a more specific diagnosis than kidney failure and reflects the severity and etiology of the condition. Therefore, AKI with ATN and bilateral pleural effusion are secondary diagnoses.

References:

• CDI Week 2020 Q&A: CDI and key performance indicators1
• ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting FY 20232

A query should be generated to ask the physician for the POA indicator of the fall because the documentation is unclear whether the fall was present at the time of inpatient admission or not. The POA indicator is used to identify conditions that are present or not present at the time of admission, and has payment implications for certain hospital-acquired conditions (HACs). According to CMS, a fall resulting in trauma is one of the HACs that will not be paid at a higher rate if it is not present on admission. Therefore, it is important to clarify the POA indicator of the fall to ensure accurate coding and reimbursement. A query should be non-leading, concise, clear, relevant, and consistent with CDI standards and guidelines.

References:

• CDIP® Exam Content Outline (https://www.ahima.org/media/1z0x0x1a/cdip-exam-content-outline.pdf)
• Coding | CMS1
• Present on Admission Indicators - Novitas Solutions2

The organizations that a clinical documentation integrity practitioner (CDIP) should monitor are Recovery Auditors (RAs), Program for Evaluating Payment Patterns Electronic Report (PEPPER), and Office of Inspector General (OIG). These organizations are involved in auditing, reviewing, and investigating the accuracy, completeness, and compliance of clinical documentation, coding, billing, and reimbursement practices of hospitals and other healthcare providers. The CDIP should monitor these organizations to stay updated on their policies, guidelines, findings, recommendations, and actions that may affect the CDI program and the hospital’s performance and reputation. [3][3] References: 1: https://www.ahima.org/media/owmhxbv1/cdip_contentoutline_2023_final.pdf [ 3][3]: https://my.ahima.org/store/product?id=67077

According to the CDIP® Exam Content Outline, one of the tasks of a clinical documentation integrity practitioner (CDIP) is to apply coding conventions, guidelines, and definitions for ICD-10-CM/PCS. Coding conventions are the general rules for the use of the classification system, such as the use of abbreviations, punctuation, symbols, and sequencing instructions. Coding guidelines are the official rules for selecting and reporting codes based on the documentation in the health record. Coding definitions are the explanations of the terms and concepts used in the classification system. The conventions and instructions of the classification for ICD-10-CM/PCS take precedence over any other coding reference because they are the primary source of coding rules and standards. The other coding references, such as AMA CPT Assistant, AHA Coding Clinic for ICD-10-CM/PCS, and ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting, are secondary sources that provide additional guidance, clarification, or interpretation of the coding conventions and instructions.

References:

• CDIP® Exam Content Outline (https://www.ahima.org/media/1z0x0x1a/cdip-exam-content-outline.pdf)
• ICD-10-CM Features | Diagnosis Coding: Using the ICD-10-CM1

Combination codes are used to classify two diagnoses, a diagnosis with a manifestation, or a diagnosis with an associated complication. A complication is a condition that arises during the hospital stay that prolongs the length of stay by at least one day in approximately 75 percent of cases1. Complications may affect payment and severity of illness and risk of mortality classifications. Examples of combination codes that include a diagnosis with an associated complication are:

• I50.23 Acute on chronic systolic (congestive) heart failure
• K57.21 Diverticulitis of large intestine with perforation and abscess with bleeding
• O34.211 Maternal care for incompetent cervix with cerclage, first trimester

A diagnosis that is an integral part of a disease process is not a valid option for combination codes, because it does not represent a separate or additional condition that needs to be coded. For example, chest pain is an integral part of acute myocardial infarction and does not require a separate code.

A diagnosis with an associated procedure is not a valid option for combination codes, because procedures are coded separately from diagnoses using ICD-10-PCS codes. For example, appendicitis with appendectomy is not a combination code, but rather two codes: one for the diagnosis (K35.80 Acute appendicitis without perforation or gangrene) and one for the procedure (0DTJ4ZZ Resection of appendix, percutaneous endoscopic approach).

A diagnosis with a sequelae or late effect is not a valid option for combination codes, because sequelae or late effects are coded separately from the original condition using the appropriate code from category B90-B94 Sequelae of infectious and parasitic diseases or category I69 Sequelae of cerebrovascular disease, followed by the code for the specific condition2. For example, hemiplegia following cerebral infarction is not a combination code, but rather two codes: one for the sequelae (I69.351 Hemiplegia and hemiparesis following cerebral infarction affecting right dominant side) and one for the original condition (I63.9 Cerebral infarction, unspecified).

References:

• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide, 2021 Edition. AHIMA Press. ISBN: 9781584268530
• ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting FY 2022
• Identifying ICD-10 Combination Codes - Outsource Strategies International

Tracking denials within the clinical documentation integrity program is important to identify documentation improvement opportunities and educate as necessary because it helps to analyze the root causes of denials, improve the quality and specificity of clinical documentation, and reduce the risk of future denials. Denials can also provide feedback on the effectiveness of the CDI program and the areas that need more attention or intervention. (CDIP Exam Preparation Guide)

References:

• CDIP Exam Content Outline1
• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide2

A post-discharge query is needed to obtain a more specific principal diagnosis with the highest level of severity of illness (SOI) and risk of mortality (ROM) for this patient. The discharge diagnosis of health care associated pneumonia (HCAP) is not specific enough to capture the etiology, site, and severity of the pneumonia. Based on the clinical indicators in the case scenario, such as the history of aspiration, the chest x-ray findings, the elevated white blood count, the fever, and the antibiotic treatment, a more specific diagnosis of aspiration pneumonia would be appropriate. Aspiration pneumonia is a type of pneumonia that occurs when foreign material, such as food or vomit, is inhaled into the lungs, causing inflammation and infection. Aspiration pneumonia has a higher SOI and ROM than HCAP because it is associated with more complications and poorer outcomes 1.

Additionally, the discharge diagnosis of altered mental status is vague and does not reflect the underlying cause or severity of the condition. Based on the clinical indicators in the case scenario, such as the fever, the low sodium level, the moaning and disorientation, and the venous blood gas results, a more specific diagnosis of septic encephalopathy would be appropriate. Septic encephalopathy is a type of delirium that occurs when sepsis affects the brain function, causing confusion, agitation, or reduced consciousness. Septic encephalopathy has a higher SOI and ROM than altered mental status because it indicates a systemic inflammatory response and multi-organ dysfunction 2.

Furthermore, the discharge diagnosis of respiratory distress is also vague and does not reflect the underlying cause or severity of the condition. Based on the clinical indicators in the case scenario, such as the shortness of breath, the accessory muscle use, the respiratory rate, and the bilevel positive airway pressure treatment, a more specific diagnosis of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure would be appropriate. Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure is a type of respiratory failure that occurs when there is insufficient oxygen exchange in the lungs, causing low oxygen levels in the blood. Acute hypoxemic respiratory failure has a higher SOI and ROM than respiratory distress because it indicates a life-threatening condition that requires mechanical ventilation or oxygen therapy 3.

Finally, based on the clinical indicators in the case scenario, such as the fever, the elevated white blood count, and the antibiotic treatment, a diagnosis of sepsis should also be included in the query. Sepsis is a serious complication of infection that occurs when the body’s immune system overreacts to an infection and causes widespread inflammation and organ damage. Sepsis has a high SOI and ROM because it can lead to septic shock or death if not treated promptly 4.

Therefore, a post-discharge query should ask the provider to confirm or rule out aspiration pneumonia, hyponatremia (low sodium level), septic encephalopathy, and sepsis with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure as possible diagnoses for this patient. These diagnoses would result in a more specific principal diagnosis with the highest level of SOI and ROM for this patient.

References:

• CDIP® Exam Content Outline (https://www.ahima.org/media/1z0x0x1a/cdip-exam-content-outline.pdf)
• Aspiration Pneumonia - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics1
• Septic Encephalopathy - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics2
• Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics3
• Sepsis - Symptoms and causes - Mayo Clinic4

A physician advisor/champion is a physician leader who supports and advocates for the CDI program and its objectives. A physician advisor/champion can help overcome the objections of other physicians by providing education, feedback, guidance, and mentorship on documentation best practices and their impact on revenue, quality, and patient care. A physician advisor/champion can also act as a liaison between the CDI firm and the medical staff, resolve conflicts or discrepancies in documentation, and foster a culture of collaboration and improvement. Physicians are more likely to trust and engage with their peers who understand their clinical perspective and challenges, rather than an external CDI firm that may be perceived as intrusive or disruptive.

A. Create a vision statement that outlines the project objectives. This is not sufficient to collaborate with physicians and overcome their objections. A vision statement is a general statement that describes the desired outcome of the project, but it does not address the specific concerns or questions that physicians may have about the CDI firm’s role, methods, or benefits.

B. Communicate the benefits of the CDI firm about the project. This is not enough to collaborate with physicians and overcome their objections. Communicating the benefits of the CDI firm may be informative, but it may not be persuasive or credible if it comes from the CDI firm itself, without any endorsement or support from a physician leader within the organization.

C. Hire a consultant to communicate the benefits to the physicians. This is not a good way to collaborate with physicians and overcome their objections. Hiring a consultant may add another layer of complexity and cost to the project, and it may not improve the trust or relationship between the CDI firm and the physicians. A consultant may also lack the clinical expertise or authority to influence the physicians’ behavior or attitude.

References:

• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide, 2021 Edition. AHIMA Press. ISBN: 9781584268530
• Q&A: Defining roles for physician advisor/champion | ACDIS
• Q&A: The Role of the Physician Advisor in CDI | ACDIS
• The Role of a Physician Advisor - UASI Solutions
• PA/NP in Physician Champion / Advisor Role — ACDIS Forums

A yes/no query may not be used in circumstances where only clinical indicators of a condition are present, and the condition/diagnosis has not been documented in the health record because it may lead to leading or suggesting a diagnosis that is not supported by the provider’s documentation. A yes/no query should only be used when there is clear and consistent documentation of a condition/diagnosis in the health record, and the query is seeking confirmation or denial of a specific fact or detail related to that condition/diagnosis. A multiple-choice, open-ended, or verbal query may be more appropriate to allow the provider to choose from a list of possible diagnoses, provide additional information, or explain the clinical reasoning behind the documentation. (CDIP Exam Preparation Guide)

References:

• CDIP Exam Content Outline1
• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide2
• AHIMA Practice Brief: Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice3

This response provides the highest level of specificity for the patient’s diagnosis because it includes the following elements:

• The type of heart failure: diastolic, which means the heart has difficulty relaxing and filling with blood during diastole, resulting in increased filling pressures and pulmonary congestion. Diastolic heart failure is also known as heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), which is defined as an ejection fraction of 50% or higher 2.
• The acuity of heart failure: acute on chronic, which means the patient has a history of chronic heart failure that has worsened acutely due to a precipitating factor, such as infection, ischemia, arrhythmia, or medication noncompliance. Acute on chronic heart failure is associated with higher mortality and morbidity than stable chronic heart failure 3.
• The associated conditions: hypertensive renal disease and CKD 3, which indicate that the patient has kidney damage and reduced kidney function due to high blood pressure. CKD 3 is the third stage of chronic kidney disease, which is characterized by a glomerular filtration rate of 30 to 59 mL per minute per 1.73 m2 4.

The other responses are less specific because they either omit or misrepresent some of these elements. For example, response B incorrectly states that the patient has systolic heart failure, which is contradicted by the echocardiogram result. Response C does not specify whether the heart failure is chronic or acute on chronic, which has implications for treatment and prognosis. Response D does not specify the type of heart failure, which affects the coding and classification of the condition.

References: 1: AHIMA CDIP Exam Prep, Fourth Edition, p. 133 5 2: Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF) | American Heart Association 3: Acute-on-Chronic Heart Failure: A High-Risk Phenotype Needing Separate Attention 4: Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) | National Kidney Foundation

According to the AHIMA best practice for written queries, queries should be limited to non-leading questions that do not imply a specific answer or diagnosis, but rather ask for the provider’s opinion based on their clinical judgment and the evidence in the health record. Non-leading questions help to ensure that the query is compliant, objective, and respectful of the provider’s authority and autonomy. Leading questions, on the other hand, may introduce bias, influence the provider’s response, or compromise the integrity of the documentation and coding. For example, a non-leading query for a patient with chest pain would be: “What is the etiology of the chest pain?” A leading query would be: “Is the chest pain due to acute myocardial infarction?”

References:

• CDIP® Exam Content Outline (https://www.ahima.org/media/1z0x0x1a/cdip-exam-content-outline.pdf)
• Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice—2022 Update1

Unbundling services falls under the False Claims Act because it is a form of coding fraud that involves billing separately for components of a related group of procedures or tests that should be billed as a single code. For example, if a provider performs a comprehensive metabolic panel, which is a blood test that measures several components of the blood, such as glucose, electrolytes, and liver enzymes, and bills for each component individually instead of using the single code for the panel, that is unbundling. Unbundling services can result in overpayment by the government and can violate the False Claims Act, which prohibits submitting false or fraudulent claims for payment to the government, including the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Violators of the False Claims Act can face civil penalties of up to three times the amount of the false claim plus an additional $11,000 per claim 23.

References: 1: AHIMA CDIP Exam Prep, Fourth Edition, p. 133 4 2: Coding Fraud | VSG 5 3: False Claims Act | OIG 2

According to the AHIMA CDIP Exam Preparation Guide, a query is a communication tool or process used to clarify documentation in the health record for documentation integrity and accurate code assignment1. A query should be clear, concise, and consistent, and should include relevant clinical indicators that support the query1. A query should also provide multiple choice answer options that are supported by clinical indicators and include a non-leading query statement2. In this case, the CDIP queried the physician to clarify the current acuity of the diagnosis of chronic systolic heart failure, based on clinical indicators suggestive of an exacerbation of systolic heart failure. The subsequent documentation in the health record that suggests the provider did not understand the query is A. The patient has chronic systolic heart failure. This documentation does not address the query or provide any additional information about the patient’s condition. It simply repeats the same diagnosis that was already documented in the progress note. This documentation does not reflect the patient’s true severity of illness, risk of mortality, or reimbursement3. The other options are not correct because they do provide some information about the current acuity of the diagnosis of chronic systolic heart failure, such as acute on chronic, exacerbation, or decompensation. These terms indicate a higher level of severity and complexity than chronic alone. References:

• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide - AHIMA
• Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice (2019 Update) - AHIMA
• Severity of Illness: What Is It? Why Is It Important? | HCPro
• [Q&A: Acute on chronic versus decompensated heart failure | ACDIS]

Creating policies and procedures for the query process will help eliminate confusion among CDI staff, providers, coders, and other stakeholders regarding the purpose, scope, format, and expectations of the query process. Policies and procedures should be based on industry standards and best practices, and should be reviewed and updated regularly.

References: AHIMA/ACDIS. “Guidelines for Achieving a Compliant Query Practice (2019 Update).” Journal of AHIMA 90, no. 2 (February 2019): 20-29.

Engaging the CDI physician advisor/champion in an effort to avoid future denials is a strategy that impacts the goal of improving documentation integrity by leveraging the influence and expertise of a physician leader who can educate, mentor, and advocate for other physicians on documentation best practices. The CDI physician advisor/champion can act as a liaison between the CDI team and the medical staff, provide feedback and guidance on complex or challenging cases, resolve conflicts or discrepancies in documentation, and promote a culture of collaboration and quality improvement. Physicians are more likely to learn and adopt documentation integrity practices from their peers who understand their clinical perspective and challenges, rather than from non-physician CDI staff or managers.

A. The CDI manager will exclusively provide education. This is incorrect because engaging the CDI physician advisor/champion implies that the CDI manager will not be the sole source of education, but rather will partner with the physician leader to deliver effective and tailored education to the medical staff.

C. Physicians can manage the documentation integrity process. This is incorrect because engaging the CDI physician advisor/champion does not mean that physicians will take over the responsibility of managing the documentation integrity process, which involves multiple stakeholders, such as CDI specialists, coders, quality analysts, and auditors. Rather, physicians will be more involved and supportive of the documentation integrity process as a result of the education and mentorship provided by the CDI physician advisor/champion.

D. Clinicians will not require documentation integrity education. This is incorrect because engaging the CDI physician advisor/champion does not eliminate the need for documentation integrity education for clinicians, but rather enhances and facilitates it by using a peer-to-peer approach that can increase awareness, engagement, and compliance among physicians.

References:

• CDIP Exam Preparation Guide, 2021 Edition. AHIMA Press. ISBN: 9781584268530
• Q&A: Defining roles for physician advisor/champion | ACDIS
• Q&A: The Role of the Physician Advisor in CDI | ACDIS
• The Role of a Physician Advisor - UASI Solutions
• PA/NP in Physician Champion / Advisor Role — ACDIS Forums

The proper sequencing of the principal and secondary diagnoses in this case is as follows:

• Principal diagnosis: Acute appendicitis. This is the condition, after study, that occasioned the admission to the hospital, according to the ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting. The patient was admitted for laparoscopic surgery, which is a definitive treatment for acute appendicitis. The physician documented “possible acute appendicitis or probable Meckel diverticulitis” as the cause of the right lower quadrant abdominal pain. According to the AHA’s Coding Clinic, Fourth Quarter 2016, pp. 147-148, when a physician documents two diagnoses connected by “or”, coders should query the physician for clarification if possible. However, if a query is not possible or not answered, coders should assign codes for both conditions, unless one of them has been ruled out or confirmed by further testing or treatment. In this case, there is no indication that either acute appendicitis or Meckel diverticulitis has been ruled out or confirmed by further testing or treatment. Therefore, both conditions should be coded and reported. However, only one of them can be the principal diagnosis. Since acute appendicitis is more commonly associated with laparoscopic surgery than Meckel diverticulitis, and since it has a higher relative weight than Meckel diverticulitis under the MS-DRG system, it is reasonable to select acute appendicitis as the principal diagnosis 23.
• Secondary diagnosis: Right lower quadrant abdominal pain. This is a sign or symptom that is associated with the principal diagnosis and requires clinical evaluation, therapeutic treatment, diagnostic procedures, extended length of hospital stay, or increased nursing care and/or monitoring. The patient presented with right lower quadrant abdominal pain as a manifestation of acute appendicitis or Meckel diverticulitis. The pain required clinical evaluation by abdominal ultrasound and therapeutic treatment by laparoscopic surgery. Therefore, it should be coded and reported as a secondary diagnosis 4.
• Secondary diagnosis: Type I diabetes mellitus. This is a chronic condition that affects the patient’s care in terms of requiring diagnostic or therapeutic services or affecting patient outcomes or resource utilization. The patient has a history of type I diabetes mellitus and received an injection of neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin to normalize the blood sugar level prior to surgery. Therefore, it should be coded and reported as a secondary diagnosis 4.

References: 1: AHIMA CDIP Exam Prep, Fourth Edition, p. 133 2: ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting FY 2021, Section II.A 3: AHA Coding Clinic for ICD-10-CM and ICD-10-PCS, Fourth Quarter 2016 4: ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting FY 2021, Section III.C : AHIMA CDIP Exam Prep, Fourth Edition https://my.ahima.org/store/product?id=67077

A CDI program’s vision should reflect its purpose, values, and goals, and align with the organization’s overall vision and mission. Value and mission statements help define the CDI program’s role, scope, and objectives, and communicate them to stakeholders. Reporting and the use of technology are important tools for a CDI program, but they are not part of its vision. Benchmarks and case mix index are performance indicators that measure the CDI program’s outcomes, but they do not reflect its vision. Diagnostic related groups and revenue cycle are aspects of reimbursement that may be affected by the CDI program, but they are not the primary focus of its vision.

Sharing the mission of the CDI program should be done to ensure a clear sense of what CDI is and the CDI practitioner’s role within the organization. The mission statement defines the purpose, goals, and values of the CDI program, and how it aligns with the organization’s vision and strategy. The mission statement also communicates the benefits and expectations of the CDI program to various stakeholders, such as providers, executives, coders, quality staff, and patients. The mission statement can help establish the credibility, professionalism, and identity of the CDI practitioners, and guide their daily activities and decisions 2.

References: 1: AHIMA CDIP Exam Prep, Fourth Edition, p. 133 3 2: Mission CDI: Guiding goals, values, and principles 1

Aspiration pneumonia is a type of pneumonia that occurs when food, saliva, liquids, or vomit is breathed into the lungs or airways leading to the lungs, causing an infection or inflammation. Aspiration pneumonia is more likely to occur in people who have difficulty swallowing, such as those with a history of CVA2. In this case, the patient has a history of CVA and difficulty swallowing, and presents with nausea and vomiting, which are risk factors for aspiration. The CXR reveals a right lower lobe infiltrate, which is a common finding in aspiration pneumonia3. The physician documents pneumonia as the diagnosis, but does not specify the type or cause. Therefore, clarification is needed to determine if aspiration pneumonia is clinically indicated, as it would affect the coding and reimbursement of the case. Aspiration pneumonia is coded as ICD-10-CM code J69.x Pneumonitis due to solids and liquids, with a fourth digit required to specify the inhaled substance4.

References:

• CDI Week 2020 Q&A: CDI and key performance indicators1
• Mayo Clinic: Aspiration pneumonia2
• Medscape: Aspiration Pneumonia3
• ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Code J69.x: Pneumonitis due to solids and liquids4