A Guide to Coding and Billing for the Audiological Management of Patients Receiving Ototoxic Medical Treatments

Abstract

Purpose Improved medical care leading to increased survivorship among patients with cancer and infectious diseases has created a need for ototoxicity monitoring programs nationwide. The goal of this report is to promote effective and standardized coding and 3rd-party payer billing practices for the audiological management of symptomatic ototoxicity. Method The approach was to compile the relevant International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10-CM) codes and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT; American Medical Association) codes and explain their use for obtaining reimbursement from Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance. Results Each claim submitted to a payer for reimbursement of ototoxicity monitoring must include both ICD-10-CM codes to report the patient's diagnosis and CPT codes to report the services provided by the audiologist. Results address the general 3rd-party payer guidelines for ototoxicity monitoring and ICD-10-CM and CPT coding principles and provide illustrative examples. There is no “stand-alone” CPT code for high-frequency audiometry, an important test for ototoxicity monitoring. The current method of adding a –22 modifier to a standard audiometry code and then submitting a letter rationalizing why the test was done has inconsistent outcomes and is time intensive for the clinician. Similarly, some clinicians report difficulty getting reimbursed for detailed otoacoustic emissions testing in the context of ototoxicity monitoring. Conclusions Ethical practice, not reimbursement, must guide clinical practice. However, appropriate billing and coding resulting in 3rd-party reimbursement for audiology services rendered is critical for maintaining an effective ototoxicity monitoring program. Many 3rd-party payers reimburse for these services. For any CPT code, payment patterns vary widely within and across 3rd-party payers. Standardizing coding and billing practices as well as advocacy including letters from audiology national organizations may be necessary to help resolve these issues of coding and coverage in order to support best practice recommendations for ototoxicity monitoring.