With five times as many codes as ICD-9, ICD-10 is certainly more specific. It’s no wonder, then, that the use of unspecified codes has become a common topic of discussion among healthcare professionals. Unspecified codes are incredibly common in coding with ICD-9. However, there’s a general consensus that using unspecified ICD-10 codes could prove detrimental. In addition to corrupting the reliability and validity of the data, the use of unspecified codes could lead to claim denials. With such implications weighing over their heads, many people have become fearful of unspecified codes. However, according to a report from Health Data Consulting’s (HDC) Joseph C. Nichols, “While it is true that we should be as specific as possible to assure the best quality information, most of the discussions around unspecified codes don’t really get at what ‘unspecified’ means relevant to codes let alone when they should or shouldn’t be used.” So, with that, let’s get specific with unspecified.

Unspecified Defined

According to a presentation by the National Association of Rural Health Clinics (NARHC), unspecified is defined as:

Coding that does not fully define important parameters of the patient condition that could otherwise be defined given information available to the observer (clinician) and the coder.

When described in this way, “unspecified” takes on an altogether different definition of “unspecified codes.” “Unspecified” is simply coding that’s too vague when there’s actually information available that would allow for greater specificity. In this sense, yes, “unspecified” does have a negative connotation. “Unspecified codes,” however, are actual ICD-10 codes that describe diagnoses, but instead of containing specifics—such as laterality—the description of the code simply ends with “unspecified.” And herein lies the confusion. When does the use of an “unspecified code” correlate with the definition of “unspecified”? And when is it actually acceptable to use an unspecified code?

When to Use Unspecified Codes

According to NARHC and HDC, the following are instances in which an unspecified code may be acceptable:

  • The patient may be early in the course of evaluation, meaning the clinician may not yet know enough to apply a more specific code
  • The claim may be from a provider who is not directly related to the diagnosis of the patient’s condition
  • The clinician seeing the patient may be more of a generalist who is not able to define the condition at a level of detail expected by a specialist

For specific examples of these instances, scroll to page eight of this report. You may be wondering: in the abovementioned instances, why not select a more specific code even if the practitioner doesn’t necessarily have all the facts? As HDC’s Nichols explains, “Forcing coders to use a ‘specified’ code may result in the unintended consequence of creating misinformation that assumes something is true when there is no real evidence to support that level of specificity.” As a result, the patient might receive a diagnosis that isn’t truly representative of their condition. That affects treatment going forward as well as the historical accuracy of that patient’s health record.

When Not to Use Unspecified Codes

Again, according to NARHC and HDC, practitioners should avoid unspecified codes when:

  • There is sufficient information available to more accurately define the condition
  • They can account for basic concepts such as:
    • Laterality (right, left, bilateral, unilateral)
    • Anatomical locations
    • Trimester (of pregnancy)
    • Type of diabetes
    • Known complications or comorbidities
    • Description of severity, acuity, or other known parameters
  • They implement care that demands a more specific level of detail
  • They’re specialists, because as specialists, they should be able to provide the detail required

For specific examples of when not to report, scroll to page nine of this report.

Ultimately, like patient documentation, coding is about justification. If you’re simply selecting an unspecified code as a time-saving measure, or if you pause to wonder whether that unspecified code is appropriate for a particular diagnosis, then you probably shouldn’t use it. If you have questions or doubts, your payers likely will, too. After all, they need justification to reimburse you for your services.

WebPT + Billing Software - Regular BannerWebPT + Billing Software - Small Banner
  • Founder Letter: ICD-What? Image

    articleSep 3, 2015 | 7 min. read

    Founder Letter: ICD-What?

    By now, it’s obvious that the entire US healthcare system is going to face a huge change come October 1: the transition to ICD-10 . This new—well, new to us—way of coding has been on the discussion table for decades , and for the last several years, its implementation has been the topic of much anticipation as well as a fair amount of resistance. So, if you find yourself in the dark—completely unaware that ICD-10 is happening—then …

  • ICD-10 FAQ Part 4 Image

    articleNov 3, 2015 | 5 min. read

    ICD-10 FAQ Part 4

    Like the many Land Before Time sequels, the versions of our ICD-10 FAQ keep on-a-comin’. But—unlike those beloved dinosaur tales—I don’t anticipate 12 more versions (plus a TV series) will be necessary to cover what’s to come with ICD-10. Still, the questions continue to roll in—albeit a bit slower than they did a couple of months ago. However, most of the inquiries we’ve received in recent weeks have been super specific. That’s why, our most recent webinar—the …

  • ICD-10: Fact or Fiction Image

    articleApr 3, 2014 | 5 min. read

    ICD-10: Fact or Fiction

    As with any major change, the rumor mill churns at a mighty pace. With all the hearsay, telephone games, and disbursement of misinformation, it’s easy for the myths to swallow the truth. No worries, though; we’re here to sort the fact from the fiction. Fiction: Coders will spend an overwhelming amount of time dealing with external cause codes. Fact: From being struck by an orca to getting injured while crocheting, Chapter 20 of the ICD-10-CM Manual , …

  • articleOct 3, 2013 | 4 min. read

    ICD-10 Questions and Answers

    So, you’ve got some questions about ICD-10. We don’t blame you. There’s a lot going on with the transition to these new diagnostic codes―which will occur October 1, 2015―and it’s best to be on your toes. That’s why we put together this handy-dandy list of questions―and, more importantly, answers―to help you stay on pointe. What’s ICD-10? ICD-10 is the tenth revision to the International Classification of Diseases. Check out this World Health Organization article for a complete …

  • A Farewell Ode to ICD-9 Image

    articleSep 30, 2015 | 2 min. read

    A Farewell Ode to ICD-9

    As the hours count down It’s hard to believe That we’ve finally made it To ICD-10 Eve Our journey to get here Hasn’t been without strife As the US has clung To ICD-9 for dear life Letting go can be hard And change can be tough But in the modern medical world ICD-9 just isn’t enough Unlike a fine wine That gets better with time ICD-9 has aged poorly— It’s way past its prime Sure, we’ll always …

  • How to Test ICD-10 Internally Image

    articleApr 28, 2014 | 4 min. read

    How to Test ICD-10 Internally

    ICD-10 is coming—as of now, it’s slated for 2015. But just because it’s been delayed doesn’t mean you should delay your testing plans. Today, we’ll discuss how to test ICD-10 internally (and tomorrow, we’ll tackle testing externally). In this article , Brooke Andrus wrote about Advanced MD ’s testing plan, which includes testing to ensure that: Your staff can competently use the new codes. Each redesigned process or workflow actually works. But before you begin, you should …

  • articleOct 21, 2013 | 5 min. read

    Why You Should Test ICD-10 Before October 1

    “ICD-10 is coming. ICD-10 is coming.” You might be tempted to turn away, go back to work, and ignore this Paul Revere-style warning. But that would be unwise. Sure, October 1, 2015, might seem far, far away, but we all know that time flies, and this ICD-10 implementation deadline will be here before we know it. So let’s put a big X on the calendar, and begin our countdown to preparedness. Today, we’re talking about the importance …

  • Beware of ICD-10 Shortcuts: The Case Against One-to-One Crosswalking Image

    articleFeb 24, 2015 | 7 min. read

    Beware of ICD-10 Shortcuts: The Case Against One-to-One Crosswalking

    ICD-10 is inherently more sophisticated and specific than ICD-9, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s more complicated. So, why are healthcare professionals pulling their hair out over the mandatory transition to these new codes? Because learning ICD-10 is like learning a new language. If we were going into this with a clean slate–like a newborn babe—perhaps it wouldn’t be so tough to learn the language. Unfortunately, though, the US healthcare industry has relied on ICD-9 codes for …

  • ICD-10 Bootcamp: Coding Exercises for PTs, OTs, and SLPs Image

    webinarJul 30, 2015

    ICD-10 Bootcamp: Coding Exercises for PTs, OTs, and SLPs

    As the old saying goes, “Practice makes perfect.” But with the transition to ICD-10 kicking off in a little more than a month, there’s not a whole lot of practice time left. Before you know it, you’ll be taking the field for game time—and this is one game where you definitely can’t rely on talent alone. Looking for a way to get you and your staff members in ICD-10-coding shape—fast? Consider this your ICD-10 boot camp. In …

Achieve greatness in practice with the ultimate EMR for PTs, OTs, and SLPs.