querxacey or not to query

I was wondering what other CDS would do in this situation. 90 year old was admitted with copd exacerbation and diabetes out of control. Pulmonary Md admitted the pt and was the attending. Pt had a complicated medical hx but no cc's or mcc's. Creatinine was 1.5 with GFR 36 on day 1. On day 3 the endocrine Md ordered a panel and the Creatinine had risen to 2.63 with GFR 21. This was not rechecked and not mentioned anywhere in the progress notes and there was no mention of renal status in the h&p. There was no order for iv fluid and the pt was discharged without a repeat Creatinine. I was worried the Md's had missed it completely but I don't think that is the purpose of a query. I did not query but was wondering if anyone else would have.
Thank you!
Melinda Scharf RN BSN CCDS

________________________________
Notice from St. Joseph Health System:
Please note that the information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure.

Comments

  • My initial response is No, I would not query as it was not treated.

    Katy Good, RN, BSN
    Clinical Documentation Program Coordinator
    Flagstaff Medical Center
    Kathryn.Good@nahealth.com
    Office: 928.214.3864
    Cell: 928.814.9404

  • edited May 2016
    When I am not sure about something I leave a sticky note on the chart. I would have ? if the pt needed to have some ivf or at least repeat labs. Then if things changed you could query.



    Tracy M Peyton RN, CCDS
    Case Management
    Bradford Regional Medical Center
    Upper Allegany Health Systems
    116 Interstate Parkway
    Bradford, PA 16701
    814-558-0406




  • edited May 2016
    Verbal query for the abnormal lab results

    Tracey

  • edited May 2016
    I would have queried also, since I do review labs, and asked if it is
    clinically significant.



    Robert



    Robert S. Hodges, BSN, MSN, RN, CCDS

    Clinical Documentation Improvement Specialist

    Aleda E. Lutz VAMC

    Mail Code 136

    1500 Weiss Street

    Saginaw MI 48602



    P: 989-497-2500 x13101

    F: 989-321-4912

    E: Robert.Hodges2@va.gov



    "We are dealing with Veterans, not procedures; With their problems, not
    ours." --General Omar Bradley



  • I believe you could make a case for apparent renal disease - but it is
    'case-by-case: It is a bit involved as the Medical Staff 'should note
    some concern for the apparent renal function' - at least in my opinion,
    in order for one to query. Repeat lab testing to establish the
    existence of CKD justifies code assignment for same, but in your
    scenario, it is not readily apparent if a query is justified.



    However, CKD, if/when noted, is one of those chronic conditions that is
    always considered reportable as the condition is chronic and may have
    life-long consequences impacting a patient. (The condition of CKD
    always affects Medical-Decision-Making in terms of treatment options,
    such as antibiotic uses, potential for nephrotoxicity, and so forth).





    But, the scenario presented stating no concern was evident would make me
    hesitant to query regarding the renal function. If I could not state
    that a renal consult was performed, or that the condition was treated
    or further specifically evaluated, I would not query.




    Clinical Evaluation Defined




    Clinical evaluation means the medical staff is aware of the condition
    and is evaluating it in terms of evaluation, testing, consultations, and
    clinical observation of the patient's condition and/or the existence of
    the condition affect the types or choices of treatment rendered to the
    patient.

    .



    Per Faye Brown, 2006, "Codes should not be assigned for conditions that
    do not meet UHDDS criteria for reporting. For example, diagnostic
    reports often mention such conditions such as hiatal hernia,
    atelectasis, and right bundle branch block with no further mention to
    indicate any relevance to the care given. Assigning a code is
    inappropriate for reporting purposes unless the physician provides
    documentation to support the condition's significance for the episode of
    care"



    Paul Evans, RHIA





    Paul Evans, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P

    Supervisor, Clinical Documentation Integrity, Quality Department

    California Pacific Medical Center

    2351 Clay #243

    San Francisco, CA 94115

    Cell: 415.637.9002

    Fax: 415.600.1325

    Ofc: 415.600.3739

  • Paul, I agree. That is why my initial response would be not to query. Our queries are a part of the medical record. I would be concerned that without any evaluation/treatment of the condition my query may appear to be inappropriate in some way. Also, If they did answer my query with "Acute Renal Failure", I don't think it would fit criteria as a secondary diagnosis anyways unless they decided to repeat labs or treat in some way. So, if the reason for query is to add an additional dx, I don't think it's very appropriate to query in this instance. The point of CDI is to help present an accurate clinical picture of the patient and to capture resources being used in the hospital. In this case, it doesn't appear that the possible renal failure impacted care in any way.
    However, if I was concerned that something was missed by the MD that could significantly impact the patient I think it is appropriate to talk to the MD about it. I would probably ask the patients nurse if the labs have been discussed and maybe ask her/him to bring it up with the MD if appropriate. I would not count that as a query though.

    Katy Good, RN, BSN
    Clinical Documentation Program Coordinator
    Flagstaff Medical Center
    Kathryn.Good@nahealth.com
    Office: 928.214.3864
    Cell: 928.814.9404

  • edited May 2016
    I would have sent a query just asking if the change in Creatinine was of significance in this case. By doing that, I am not so much concerned about a CC or MCC as the fact that the physicians may not have seen the lab results.

  • I would not query since there was no treatment rendered.

  • edited May 2016
    I agree. Because the change is acute it should be addressed and asked
    if it is clinically significant. If the change is chronic and not
    treated, then I agree with the no query since the patient is at
    baseline. I don't feel I'm doing my due diligence for the patient if I
    don't at least ask if an acute change is significant. After all, isn't
    the goal a complete and accurate medical record?



    Robert



    Robert S. Hodges, BSN, MSN, RN, CCDS

    Clinical Documentation Improvement Specialist

    Aleda E. Lutz VAMC

    Mail Code 136

    1500 Weiss Street

    Saginaw MI 48602



    P: 989-497-2500 x13101

    F: 989-321-4912

    E: Robert.Hodges2@va.gov



    VA Core Values: Integrity, Commitment, Advocacy, Respect, Excellence
    ("I CARE")

    VA Core Characteristics: Trustworthy, Accessible, Quality, Innovative,
    Agile, Integrated



    "We are dealing with Veterans, not procedures; With their problems, not
    ours." --General Omar Bradley



    This message and accompanying documents are covered by the Electronic
    Communications Privacy Act, The Health Insurance Portability and
    Accountability Act of 1996, 38 USC 5705, 38 USC 5701, 38 USC 7332, The
    Privacy Act of 1974 and their implementing federal regulations.
    Information included in the message is intended for specified
    individual(s) only. This information is confidential. If you are not the
    intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the
    intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this
    document in error and that any review, dissemination, copying, or the
    taking of any action based on the contents of this email is strictly
    prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
    notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. Any
    unauthorized disclosure of confidential information is subject to the
    criminal penalty provisions of the above statutes.



  • Katy - yes, particular for Acute Renal Failure, I, too would expect to
    at least see IV fluids in order to justify coding or a query for same.
    But, these were pretty significant changes in Cr - odd not addressed by
    MD. I would error on the side of caution on this particular case.



    Paul Evans, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P

    Supervisor, Clinical Documentation Integrity, Quality Department

    California Pacific Medical Center

    2351 Clay #243

    San Francisco, CA 94115

    Cell: 415.637.9002

    Fax: 415.600.1325

    Ofc: 415.600.3739

  • Yes, Katy - this one is a bit tricky and I believe one would have to
    approach the situation carefully recognizing that the lack of treatment
    'alone' does not preclude one from either performing a query for a
    condition nor coding said condition. For instance, if a patient
    presents with ICH causing 'significant midline shift' resulting in
    decision to make pt Palliative, this would not preclude a CDI from
    performing a query regarding the 'shift'.



    If the Radiologist, for instance, stated this shift was due to edema
    with Herniation of the brain, and, again, a decision was made to place
    on Comfort only, then I could query for the edema or Herniation as
    'shift' is not a diagnosis. However, the true severity of illness,
    mechanism of death, and MEDICAL-DECISION making to place the patient on
    comfort care would only be captured if I could also code the
    Edema/Hernia due to the ICH.



    So, while active treatment makes for an 'easy' argument to code
    condition "x', consideration solely of treatment is not the only factor
    to consider for CDI function or coding.



    Paul



    Paul Evans, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P

    Supervisor, Clinical Documentation Integrity, Quality Department

    California Pacific Medical Center

    2351 Clay #243

    San Francisco, CA 94115

    Cell: 415.637.9002

    Fax: 415.600.1325

    Ofc: 415.600.3739

  • Paul, I completely agree.

    Katy Good, RN, BSN
    Clinical Documentation Program Coordinator
    Flagstaff Medical Center
    Kathryn.Good@nahealth.com
    Office: 928.214.3864
    Cell: 928.814.9404

  • The stated GFR and abrupt changes in Serum Cr seem to indicate Acute on
    Chronic Renal Failure - however, with no stated treatment for acute
    renal failure, my message dealt more with the potential to capture any
    apparent CKD rather than the acute component. Depending upon the
    stage, CKD can be a CC or MCC and also a factor for ROM - we also know
    584.9 is a also a CC affecting ROM.



    Lack of treatment for ARF would be my main concern - on the other hand,
    the establishment of CKD as a condition is 'always reportable' for every
    encounter and 'active treatment' of CRF is not required for coding
    purposes.



    Paul







    Paul Evans, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P

    Supervisor, Clinical Documentation Integrity, Quality Department

    California Pacific Medical Center

    2351 Clay #243

    San Francisco, CA 94115

    Cell: 415.637.9002

    Fax: 415.600.1325

    Ofc: 415.600.3739

  • edited May 2016
    A verbal query would have been in order in my opinion. Our mission as a
    CDI Program is to strive not only for the highest degree of accuracy in
    the medical record, but also to, as people with clinical background to
    contribute to the highest quality of care for our patients. In the
    past, we have had several cases where because we had a verbal
    interaction with the MD regarding the significance of a finding, the
    patient's care was enhanced and reflected in the medical record. I'm
    assuming concurrent review in this case. Donna

    Donna Kent, RN, BSN, CCDS
    Manager, Clinical Documentation Integrity Program
    Clinical Quality and Accreditation
    Torrance Memorial Medical Center
    ph.:310 784-6884 fax:310 784-6899
    donna.kent@tmmc.com
  • Katy & Donna - agree, verbal would be a strategy to consider for
    concurrent review.



    Paul Evans, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P

    Supervisor, Clinical Documentation Integrity, Quality Department

    California Pacific Medical Center

    2351 Clay #243

    San Francisco, CA 94115

    Cell: 415.637.9002

    Fax: 415.600.1325

    Ofc: 415.600.3739

  • Yes, but a verbal query is also, per our P&P, entered into the body of
    the record as a Permanent Part of the Record.



    A 'verbal' becomes a permanent part of our record. So, I would be
    cautious for medico-legal purposes in the event a 3rd party may review
    the record for whatever reason.



    An astute 3rd party could view this as failure to recognize and/or treat
    acute renal failure. I would discuss this with the MD to whom I report
    and perhaps ask him to interact with the treating/attending MD for that
    reason.



    Paul Evans, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P

    Supervisor, Clinical Documentation Integrity, Quality Department

    California Pacific Medical Center

    2351 Clay #243

    San Francisco, CA 94115

    Cell: 415.637.9002

    Fax: 415.600.1325

    Ofc: 415.600.3739

  • edited May 2016
    Great input! I think it brings up the question of the obligation to the pt. I think most of us are nurses and don't like the thought that something is being "missed". This pt was discharged before any kind of interaction with the Md could be done. The Md is an "outlier" and I rarely see him. I hope the patient is not readmitted with acute renal failure!
    Thanks,
    Melinda Scharf RN BSN CCDS

  • edited May 2016
    This is a great and complex discussion. Many facets to consider. I
    don't think there is an absolute blueprint for this type of situation.
    We would want to take a very big picture approach. However, if I was
    concerned that a patient was possibly not receiving appropriate
    treatment for a significant condition and had my ducks in a row, so to
    speak, I would not hesitate to have a conversation with the physician.
    I might consider the possibility of not entering a query in to our
    system if the outcome of that conversation was not a positive one so as
    not to implicate the physician.

    Donna Kent, RN, BSN, CCDS
    Manager, Clinical Documentation Integrity Program
    Clinical Quality and Accreditation
    Torrance Memorial Medical Center
    ph.:310 784-6884 fax:310 784-6899
    donna.kent@tmmc.com
  • edited May 2016
    My take is I would not query for CKD unless I could see about 90 days of past creatinines. This admit creatinine 1.5 could have been the beginning of the acute rise in creatinine. I would definitely query to include acute renal failure as one of the choices. The fact that there was no note or treatment doesn't say to me it was not significant or did not exist but that there was a high possibility it was not seen/evaluated by a physician. It has been extremely rewarding as a CDS for 7+ years to query in an instance like this with the outcome of seeing orders for repeat labs and consults with the patient receiving the appropriate care. We can affect patient care positively in instances such as these. With Epic we don't have easy access to the nursing staff. If I could see from the notes that the patient was to be possibly discharged that day or the next, besides the online query, I would call the attending physician to also discuss the issue as a verbal query.


  • edited May 2016
    In situations like this I usually talk to the nurse directly taking care of the patient or the charge nurse to bring to the attention of the physician the concern that I have because sometime things do get over looked. For instance I would say - hey Jane, did Dr. X see that patient Y's creatinine doubled? Would you mind bringing it to his attention - because we should all work as a team for the patient.

  • edited May 2016
    I think we should feel more than obligated to make sure the patient is taken care of- no matter what. So whatever works best to facilitate getting the issue addressed I think would be fine! I agree that I don't think a query is an appropriate avenue to address clinical issues like this one. (And what would happen if the MD didn't read the query soon enough?) For myself, I would call the MD b/c I would bring the labs to their attention and take the opportunity to clarify the diagnosis (if applicable). Our CDS nurses also speak with the patient's nurse or the care coordinators if we miss the MD. I have even taped a note to the front of the chart as a last resort! I catch home meds that were not restarted, lab changes, mental status changes, etc... Since we see the documentation we are able to help provide a safety net sometimes. I vote just do what feels right! :) Vicki

    Vicki S. Davis, RN CDS
    Clinical Documentation Improvement Manager
    Health Information Management Department
    Alamance Regional Medical Center
    Office (336) 586-3765
    Ascom Mobile (336) 586-4191
    Fax (336) 538-7428
    vdavis2@armc.com

    "The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and the lightning bug."- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens

  • While I would not query, I would want to make sure the physician reviewed the lab - I would also look at the other lab results that came back with this one. We have had many instances of lab error. So I would want to see if the other lab values were in line or out of line with the previous results. I also would not query for CKD unless the MD documented trending labs from previous months. I would hope there would be a renal consult if this was a new diagnosis for this patient.
    In our external audits we have had numerous instances where we have been penalized for coding ARF/AKI when no treatment was rendered and we have not won those appeals.
    I think it is difficult to evaluate these situations without reviewing an entire chart and seeing the pt's history, etc.
    ARF/AKI is a very touchy diagnosis which is why it was removed from the MCC list and changed to a CC unless there was more specific clarification documented.

  • Few of us may have access to 90+ days of lab values documenting past GFR
    values - with the low GFR values quoted in the original, I would query
    for CKD.





    Paul



    Paul Evans, RHIA, CCS, CCS-P

    Supervisor, Clinical Documentation Integrity, Quality Department

    California Pacific Medical Center

    2351 Clay #243

    San Francisco, CA 94115

    Cell: 415.637.9002

    Fax: 415.600.1325

    Ofc: 415.600.3739

Sign In or Register to comment.