Assuming you are asking about Medicare coverage in New Hampshire ... The
LMRP (Local Medical Review Policy) is actually somewhat vague as far as
which ICD-9 codes are actually reimburseable, follow the link below to view
the entire document. In a nutshell here is what it says:
INDICATIONS OF COVERAGE:
Non-invasive vascular studies are considered reasonable and necessary when
one of the following criteria is met:
· The patient has signs or symptoms of arterial or venous insufficiency or
· The ordering physician has a reasonable expectation that the study
outcomes will impact clinical decision-making in the medical management of
Non-invasive vascular studies are not considered reasonable and necessary
when one of the following criteria exist:
· The patient does not have signs and symptoms of arterial or venous
The ordering physician does not have a reasonable expectation that the
study outcomes will impact clinical decision- making in the medical
management of the patient, or
The study is used for screening in the absence of symptoms or clinical
indications, e.g., annual physical examinations, or
Hope this is of help.
Gene Doverspike, RVT
University Hospitals of Cleveland
On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 15:03:46 -0500, Derek Butler <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Question: Is the ICD-9 443.9 (PVD) Code for ordering a Non Invasive
>Arterial Exam Legit ?
>I have been recieving order forms and all diagnosis's are "PVD". When
>notifying the office, the nurses are adament that it is covered. Billing
>dept. is unsure.
>I thought PVD was too ambiguous to be recognized. The ICD-9 code has
>(intermittant claudication) in parenthesis.
>To unsubscribe or search other topics on UVM Flownet link to:
To unsubscribe or search other topics on UVM Flownet link to: