Yes, these are the challenging cases. The idea is to exclude patients for whom your team has ruled out traumatic injury. If your team is transferring and has not ruled …
FAQ Category Archives:
The patient would be NPTOS for the second encounter. This applies to existing injury and newly identified injury attributed to the same traumatic event.
I agree with you capturing this patient as PTOS and recording them as a transfer out since all of your documentation appears to indicate the patient was to go to …
This is a good question. Since the abrasions are not injuries that fall within the accepted PTOS ICD-10-CM code range, this patient should be excluded from PTOS. Note the following …
The reason for this inclusion/exclusion guidance is to ensure consistency statewide. It is our hope that this guidance will eliminate hospitals making differing determinations using variables that are not part …
: Since this patient is a transfer in, you will include this patient as PTOS. A patient that meets the PTOS inclusion criteria prior to the order for hospice care, …
No, this patient won’t be PTOS if the injury happened in your hospital while they were a patient. They do not need to be officially admitted, may be in ED …
These are tricky scenarios, and clarification is typically needed from the provider in order to make a determination. We recommend querying the provider for clarification on whether this is a …
No, not necessarily. If they are saying this is osteoporotic, and therefore pathological, then no it wouldn’t be PTOS. That could get coded to M80.08XA, Age-related osteoporosis with current pathological …
There is currently no flag for the NTDB/TQIP or a check in PTOS that generates if the injury date/time is unknown regarding the 14-day requirement. Therefore, it is the default …
