Nova Southeastern University Medical Decision Making Discussion
Sample Answer for Nova Southeastern University Medical Decision Making Discussion Included After Question
Description
| Diagnosis | Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) |
| ICD-10 code for the diagnosis | N39. 0 (Urinary Tract Infection, Unspecified) |
| CPT code for the diagnosis. | Urinalysis- 81001
Urine Culture- 87086 |
| HPI elements to capture the CPT code. | Brief |
| # of ROS elements to capture the CPT code. | Gastrointestinal and Genitourinary (Problem Related) |
| # of PE elements to capture the CPT Code. | 6 or more elements (expanded problem focused) |
| Determine the Plan and follow up care necessary to meet the level of Medical Decision Making (MDM) | Plan is to prescribe oral antibiotic to treat infection
Follow up if symptoms do not resolve after entire course of antibiotic treatment and another UA Low Complexity |
Develop a short paragraph about the article and how it relates to Quality Improvement with billing and coding
A Sample Answer For the Assignment: Nova Southeastern University Medical Decision Making Discussion
Title: Nova Southeastern University Medical Decision Making Discussion
Healthcare is constantly expanding, which is leading to more nurse practitioners in the outpatient setting with more autonomy with diagnosing. It is important that outpatient providers are educated on coding and informed of the ways to be reimbursed at the highest rate for the care they provide to their patients. Olmstead (2018) states that the implementation of coding for diagnosing has impacted reimbursement for NPs and providers need to understand the guidelines for accurate documentation and billing. Having ICD codes available for health care providers not only helps capture the patients state of illness but it also serves as a guide for other specialists and insurance payers leading to quality improvement practices. A key point to take away from the article is that clinicians should evaluate their “diagnosing frequency report and review denial data to assess for missed opportunities and educational moments” (Olmstead, 2018, p. 10).
References
Olmstead, J. (2018). Coding & billing practices. Understanding the importance of diagnosis coding. Nurse Practitioner, 43(10), 8–10. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NPR.0000544998.00017.de
World Health Organization. (n.d.). World Health Organization. Retrieved January 10, 2023, from https://icd.who.int/browse10/2019/en#/N39.0
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | ||
| Main Postinga | 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)
Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.
Supported by at least three current, credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
40 (40%) – 44 (44%)
Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.
Supported by at least three credible sources.
Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
35 (35%) – 39 (39%)
Responds to some of the discussion question(s).
One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.
Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Post is cited with two credible sources.
Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Contains some APA formatting errors. |
0 (0%) – 34 (34%)
Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.
Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.
Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.
Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.
Contains only one or no credible sources.
Not written clearly or concisely.
Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style. |
|
| Main Post: Timeliness | 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)
Posts main post by day 3. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not post by day 3. |
|
| First Response | 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
15 (15%) – 16 (16%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
13 (13%) – 14 (14%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 12 (12%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Second Response | 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)
Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.
Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.
Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
14 (14%) – 15 (15%)
Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.
Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.
Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.
Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.
Response is effectively written in standard, edited English. |
12 (12%) – 13 (13%)
Response is on topic and may have some depth.
Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.
Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited. |
0 (0%) – 11 (11%)
Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.
Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.
Responses to faculty questions are missing.
No credible sources are cited. |
|
| Participation | 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)
Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days. |
0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)
Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days. |
|
| Total Points: 100 | |||||