Welcome to the NEW CHUG— your ultimate destination for cutting-edge insights and discussions at the intersection of healthcare and technology.

Our platform is dedicated to exploring the dynamic landscape of healthcare technology, empowering professionals, enthusiasts, and innovators alike with the knowledge and resources to navigate the rapidly evolving field.

From telemedicine revolutionizing patient care to the transformative potential of artificial intelligence in diagnostics, we delve into a myriad of topics shaping the future of healthcare delivery. Whether you’re a seasoned healthcare IT professional, an aspiring entrepreneur in the digital health space, or simply curious about the latest innovations, our curated content, expert interviews, and thought-provoking articles provide a comprehensive exploration of healthcare technology’s most pressing issues.

Join us as we navigate the forefront of innovation, driving forward the transformation of healthcare for a healthier, more connected world.

Have questions or suggestions? Please use the contact button below.

Notifications

Clear all

CQR-USE OF IMAGING FOR LOW BACK PAIN

MU, CQR, PQRS, etc.

Last Post by Anonymous 1 second ago

3 Posts

3 Users

0 Reactions

74 Views

RSS

lyocher

(@lyocher)

Posts: 41

Trusted Member

Topic starter

Hello all,

Would anyone happen to know if CQR is programmed to record CPT codes for this measure? Our results in CQR seem to be inaccurate. Where we have a patient between the age of 18-50 yrs. old that was diagnosed with low back pain [or any applicable ICD-10 code within the value set] on the initial visit, was ordered a plain x-ray of the lower spine [or any applicable view within the value set] on the same day, this same patient is being counted in the numerator as meeting the measure.

As I understand it, the numerator count is of patients 18-50 years of age with a diagnosis of low back pain who DID NOT have an imaging study (plain X-ray, MRI, CT scan) within 28 days of the diagnosis.

I can't understand why the entire IPP we have accounted for are meeting this measure, even though an xray was ordered, and completed. Now, our x-ray orders have CPT codes on them- not LOINC codes. Could this be the problem? Does anyone have experience to share if whether we should be mapping an OBS term to a LOINC code, or is anyone else having this same issue?

Any insight is greatly appreciated!
Thanks in advance.

Lyndsay

Posted : July 1, 2016 2:30 am

mvolkert

(@mvolkert)

Posts: 143

Reputable Member

Several measures are not calculating and displaying properly in CQR since the upgrade this past weekend. We are noticing it on this same measure. Was it calculating properly for you prior to the upgrade?

Posted : July 1, 2016 6:21 am

mcwilson

(@mcwilson)

Posts: 92

Estimable Member

Lyndsay,

Did you ever get a resolution to this?

We have the exact same issue/situation that you describe. Our CQR reports for this measure are showing 100% for all our providers even though we know we have cases where an image study was ordered on the same day as the first visit. However, like you, the order is done with a CPT code verses a LOINC code.

Mike

Posted : September 23, 2016 6:32 am

Share:

24 Forums
9,940 Topics
39.9 K Posts
4 Online
6,470 Members

Forum Icons: Forum contains no unread posts Forum contains unread posts

Topic Icons: Not Replied Replied Active Hot Sticky Unapproved Solved Private Closed

Powered by wpForo Powered by wpForo version 2.4.0