“Medicine is a science of uncertainty and an art of
probability.” — William Osler
The Morning That Changed a Clinic’s Year
It was supposed to be just another mid-week catch-up for Dr.
Susan Lee, owner of a modest primary care practice in Austin, Texas.
The waiting room was calm. The coffee was hot. The schedule was steady.
Then her inbox pinged.
The subject line read: “Claim Denial Notification –
Immediate Action Required.”
Inside was a list of more than 40 patient visits—all from the past
month—rejected by her largest insurance payer.
The reason?
A blunt, sterile phrase: “Incorrect code submission.”
Her practice manager, Monica, sat down in disbelief. “But
these are the exact codes we’ve always used,” she said.
Monica wasn’t careless. In fact, she’d been praised for her attention to
detail.
But here’s what went wrong: the codes themselves were technically correct,
but the way they were attached to the claim didn’t meet the payer’s billing
rules.
The result? $18,750 in revenue frozen in limbo—money
the clinic needed to make payroll, cover rent, and keep the doors open.
The Hidden Cost of a Common Confusion
What happened to Dr. Lee’s clinic isn’t rare.
Across the United States, billing and coding mistakes cost providers
billions each year.
Industry studies estimate that up to 80% of medical bills contain some form
of error, and the average claim denial rate for outpatient practices
is between 5% and 10%.
That may sound small—until you realize that even a 5% denial rate can mean hundreds
of thousands of dollars lost annually for a medium-sized clinic.
The root problem?
Too many providers treat medical billing and medical coding as
interchangeable terms—when in reality, they are two entirely different
disciplines that must work together but can’t be collapsed into one without
risk.
Tip #1: Start by Defining the Roles
Medical Coding is about translation. Coders
take a provider’s notes and convert diagnoses, procedures, and services into
standardized codes—ICD-10 for diagnoses, CPT and HCPCS for procedures and
services.
This is the “what happened” stage of the process. It’s part language,
part medicine, and part detective work. A coder isn’t just punching numbers
into a screen—they’re interpreting the provider’s story and making sure it
matches clinical reality.
Medical Billing, on the other hand, is about transaction.
Billers take those codes and turn them into claims that go to payers for
reimbursement. They make sure claims are sent in the right format, at the right
time, with all the right modifiers and supporting documentation. They also
handle denials, appeals, and payment posting.
Put simply:
- Coders
prepare the “what.”
- Billers
manage the “how.”
Mixing up these roles is like having a scriptwriter and an
actor swap jobs on opening night—one can try to do the other’s job, but the
production will likely suffer.
Why This Distinction Matters More Than Ever in 2025
In the past, a small clinic could sometimes get away with
having one person do both roles—especially if they had years of experience. But
today, three big changes are raising the stakes:
1. AI Is Accelerating Everything (Including Mistakes)
Artificial intelligence-assisted coding tools are now
common. They speed up the translation process but also magnify small errors
into systemic problems if no one double-checks the output.
An incorrect AI-suggested modifier could slip through and affect hundreds of
claims in a matter of hours.
2. Audits Are More Aggressive
CMS has rolled out more frequent and targeted payer
audits, using predictive analytics to flag unusual patterns. This means
even small inconsistencies between a medical record and its coding can trigger
deeper scrutiny.
When auditors dig in, they look at both coding and billing—so if either
is flawed, the whole claim falls apart.
3. The 2025 Medicare Fee Schedule Updates
This year’s proposed updates include changes to how
certain codes are valued and new requirements for documentation in some
specialties. Even small valuation shifts can cause thousands of dollars in
revenue swings over the course of a year.
Fail to adapt? You could be underbilling (losing money) or overbilling (risking
compliance violations).
The Conversation No One Likes to Have
Here’s the part that frustrates many providers:
Both coding and billing are invisible until something goes wrong.
When everything is smooth, the process feels like
magic—patient is seen, notes are documented, payment arrives.
When it breaks? You’re looking at denials, appeals, delayed payments,
frustrated staff, and stressed patients.
In Dr. Lee’s case, it took three months to untangle
the denials, resubmit corrected claims, and finally get paid. By then, she had
borrowed money to cover operating costs—money she’ll be repaying well into next
year.
Why This Story Hits Home for So Many
If you’re in healthcare, you’ve probably been here before.
Maybe it wasn’t $18,750, maybe it was $2,000, or maybe it was a Medicare audit
that turned your workflow upside down for weeks.
But the truth is the same: confusing coding and billing is not a harmless
mistake—it’s a direct hit to your revenue and compliance profile.
And in 2025, with automation expanding, payer rules
shifting, and audits tightening, the difference between the two roles isn’t
just academic—it’s existential for the financial health of your practice.
Key Takeaway From Section 1:
If your team doesn’t clearly separate coding from billing—and train both
roles to understand how the other works—you’re building a revenue cycle on
quicksand.
Section 2: Expert Opinion Round-Up — What the Pros Want
You to Know
1. Dr. Maria Torres, MD — Compliance Consultant and
Former Hospitalist
When Dr. Maria Torres transitioned from a full-time
hospitalist to a healthcare compliance consultant, she thought she’d left
behind the world of coding and billing headaches. She was wrong.
“I tell my clients this all the time: your coder is your
first line of defense against audits, and your biller is your last line of
defense against losing money,” she says.
According to Torres, the most dangerous mistake in a practice isn’t forgetting
to code a flu shot—it’s assuming your coder and biller are interchangeable.
She recalls a hospital client where coders had been assigned
to also submit claims “to save time.” On paper, it seemed efficient. In
reality, it created conflicts of focus. The coders, under pressure to
meet productivity quotas, didn’t always verify payer-specific requirements
before submission.
Within three months, their denial rate jumped from 6% to 18%, costing
the facility over $400,000 in delayed revenue.
Tactical Advice from Dr. Torres:
- Separate
coding and billing duties as a rule—not an option.
- Schedule
monthly cross-training sessions so each team understands the other’s work.
- Encourage
billers to flag questionable codes and coders to review payer denials for
patterns.
Her Bottom Line:
A coder’s role is to get the claim compliant from a documentation
standpoint. A biller’s role is to get it paid. Both require expertise—but they
are not the same expertise.
2. Kevin Patel, CPC — Senior Medical Coder
Kevin Patel has been in the coding trenches for over 15
years. He’s worked in everything from orthopedic specialty clinics to large
hospital systems, and he’s seen how technology both helps and harms accuracy.
“The biggest mistake I see? Providers thinking coding is
just typing numbers into a system. It’s not,” Patel says.
“Coding is reading, interpreting, and understanding medicine.”
Patel once consulted for a mental health clinic that adopted
an AI-assisted coding platform. While it drastically sped up the process, the
coders stopped cross-checking against provider notes because the system
“seemed” to get it right.
The problem? AI pulled codes from templated language in the EHR that didn’t
always match what actually happened in the session.
Result: Over 200 claims had to be retracted after an audit found discrepancies—a
six-figure clawback.
Tactical Advice from Kevin Patel:
- AI is
a tool, not a replacement—use it to speed up, not to skip steps.
- Always
match codes to the provider’s actual words in the record.
- Specialties
change—orthopedics, cardiology, psychiatry all have unique pitfalls. Know
them.
His Bottom Line:
Good coders don’t just know the rules—they know when the rules have changed.
3. Angela Brooks, CHBME — Revenue Cycle Manager
Angela Brooks oversees a multi-location urgent care network,
managing a team of 20 billers and liaising with a separate coding department.
She says the relationship between billing and coding is like chess.
“Coding sets the board, but billing plays the game,”
she explains.
“You can have perfect coding and still lose if the billing team doesn’t know
how to work denials, appeal quickly, and manage payer quirks.”
Brooks recalls a time when a coder submitted claims for
urgent care visits using the correct CPT codes but without the required
place-of-service modifier for a specific insurer. The billing team, unfamiliar
with that insurer’s quirk, didn’t catch it before submission.
Three weeks later: 700 denials.
The fix was simple—but it took two months to recover the lost revenue.
Tactical Advice from Angela Brooks:
- Keep
a “payer rules bible” for billers, updated quarterly.
- Use
claim-scrubbing software to catch missing modifiers before submission.
- Empower
billers to question anything—no hierarchy should block communication.
Her Bottom Line:
You don’t win the reimbursement game by having one great player—you win by
having two great players who know each other’s moves.
Shared Themes from the Experts
When you distill the lessons from Dr. Torres, Kevin Patel,
and Angela Brooks, three themes emerge:
- Role
Clarity Is Non-Negotiable — Blurring responsibilities creates
inefficiency and increases denial rates.
- Communication
Prevents Revenue Leaks — Coders and billers must have constant
dialogue, not just occasional meetings.
- Technology
Needs Oversight — AI and automation are accelerators, not autopilots.
Mini Case Study: The Rural Hospital That Got It Right
In a rural Midwest hospital, the CFO decided to pilot a
“dual-track” approach: coders and billers sat together for 30 minutes each
morning to review the prior day’s work.
In the first six months:
- Denial
rates dropped from 12% to 4%.
- Average
days in accounts receivable decreased from 52 days to 31 days.
- Staff
satisfaction scores improved because everyone felt part of the same
mission.
The investment? A daily half-hour meeting and occasional
overtime budget for high-volume weeks.
The return? Nearly $1.2 million in accelerated collections over the
year.
Key Takeaway From Section 2:
Expertise without coordination is wasted potential. Your
coders and billers don’t just need to be skilled—they need to be connected.
Section 3: Tactical Advice for Busy Professionals —
Fixing the Billing vs. Coding Gap Before It Costs You
You’ve heard the stories, seen the numbers, and maybe even
lived through a nightmare denial cycle yourself.
Now let’s talk about what you can do starting today to close the gap
between coding and billing in your organization.
This is about prevention—not just damage control.
1. Separate the Roles — But Keep Them Talking
Even in small practices, the smartest move is to assign
billing and coding as distinct primary functions, even if one person wears
both hats.
Why?
When you’re coding, your brain is in compliance mode. You’re thinking
about accuracy, documentation, and alignment with clinical reality.
When you’re billing, your brain is in collection mode. You’re thinking
about deadlines, payer rules, and appeal strategies.
Trying to think in both modes simultaneously is like driving
while texting—you can do it, but eventually, you’ll crash.
Practical Step:
- Assign
primary responsibility for coding to one person (or team) and
billing to another, even if there’s overlap in cross-training.
- Use a
daily communication log or quick morning huddle to address problem
claims before submission.
2. Implement Cross-Training That Actually Works
Many clinics say they cross-train, but what they mean
is they give someone a 30-minute crash course once a year.
True cross-training means:
- A
coder spends at least one full day per quarter shadowing the
billing process.
- A
biller spends at least one full day per quarter walking through the
coding process and understanding why codes were chosen.
- Both
review denial reports together to find patterns and root causes.
Example:
A cardiology practice in Florida adopted quarterly cross-training, and within
six months, they reduced their repeat denial rate by 35% because billers
learned how to catch coding documentation gaps before claims went out.
3. Document Like You’re Being Audited
This is the single most important habit to build.
If your documentation can’t stand on its own to explain why a code was
used, you’re vulnerable to denials or clawbacks.
For Providers:
- Avoid
vague terms like “follow-up” without specifying the nature of the visit.
- Include
details that justify medical necessity.
- Remember
that if it’s not in the note, it didn’t happen—at least in the eyes
of payers.
For Coders:
- Query
the provider when documentation is unclear.
- Keep
a running list of documentation deficiencies to review during
provider training sessions.
4. Create a “Payer Rules Bible”
Every payer has its quirks. Some require specific modifiers
for telehealth. Others demand certain diagnosis code pairings for procedures to
be payable.
If your billers are relying on memory or scattered emails to track these,
you’re losing money.
Build a shared document that includes:
- Payer
name and contact info
- Filing
deadlines
- Modifier
requirements
- Code
bundling/unbundling rules
- Common
denial reasons and solutions
Update quarterly and train new hires on it as part of
onboarding.
5. Audit Yourself Before They Do
External audits are inevitable, but internal audits are your
best defense.
Basic Audit Strategy:
- Select
a random sample of claims each month (start with 20–30 if you’re small,
100+ if you’re large).
- Have
someone other than the original coder and biller review them.
- Track
errors in coding and billing—often the combination is where
problems hide.
- Share
results openly, not as punishment, but as fuel for process improvement.
Case Example:
A mid-size orthopedic group in Ohio caught a modifier misuse pattern during an
internal audit that would have triggered an insurer audit within months. By
correcting it proactively, they avoided an estimated $600,000 in recoupments.
6. Use Claim-Scrubbing Software Wisely
Claim-scrubbers are great at catching obvious errors—like
missing NPI numbers or invalid codes—but they can’t replace human logic.
Best Practice:
- Configure
scrubbers to check payer-specific rules in addition to general
coding compliance.
- Review
scrubber rejection reports weekly to see if there’s a training issue
behind recurring errors.
7. Track Metrics That Actually Matter
Many practices obsess over the number of claims submitted
per day, but volume means nothing without accuracy and speed to payment.
Key metrics to monitor:
- First-pass
resolution rate (claims paid on first submission—aim for 90%+)
- Days
in accounts receivable (target < 35 days for most specialties)
- Top
5 denial reasons (and whether they’re coding- or billing-related)
- Repeat
denial rate (should be < 5%)
These numbers tell you whether your billing/coding process
is working or leaking.
8. Don’t Ignore the Human Factor
Burnout is a silent revenue killer. Coders and billers under
constant pressure to meet productivity quotas will eventually cut corners,
leading to more errors.
What to Do:
- Rotate
tasks to prevent monotony.
- Allow
work-from-home flexibility when possible—many coding/billing roles are
remote-friendly.
- Recognize
staff for low denial rates and error-free audits, not just
volume.
9. Prepare for Annual Code Updates
ICD-10 and CPT codes update every year, and sometimes
mid-year. If you’re not ready, you’ll start January 1 with outdated codes—and
an instant spike in denials.
Preparation Checklist:
- Attend
at least one webinar or workshop on annual updates.
- Update
your EHR and billing software before the effective date.
- Train
all coding and billing staff on changes, including payer-specific impacts.
10. Have a Denial “SWAT Team”
When denials happen—and they will—you need a fast,
coordinated response.
Denial SWAT Process:
- Identify
denials in real-time (daily, not weekly).
- Assign
to the right person immediately (billing for resubmission, coding for
correction).
- Track
resolution time and outcome.
- Feed
lessons back into the workflow to prevent repeats.
Example:
An urgent care network in Arizona cut its denial turnaround time from 28 days
to 9 days by creating a two-person denial SWAT team with a dedicated dashboard.
Key Takeaway From Section 3:
The gap between coding and billing isn’t just a training
issue—it’s a process design issue.
With clear roles, shared knowledge, and proactive checks, you can prevent most
denials before they ever leave your office.
Section 4: Failure Stories + Myth-Busters — Learning the
Hard Way So You Don’t Have To
Mistakes in the billing–coding handoff don’t just
show up as annoying denial letters.
They can trigger audits, cost six figures in lost revenue, and damage your
reputation with payers.
Here are real-world inspired composite cases (names
and identifying details changed) that show what can go wrong—and how to fix it.
Failure Story #1: The $480,000 Telehealth Trap
Background:
When the pandemic hit, “Cedar Grove Family Practice” switched to telehealth
almost overnight. The providers were doing great work, but their billing
team didn’t realize certain insurers required specific telehealth modifiers
and location codes.
What Happened:
- Coders
were correctly documenting visits as E/M codes.
- Billers
submitted them without modifiers 95 or GT as required by
certain payers.
- Claims
were denied—not immediately, but in a six-month delayed batch.
- By
the time the problem was caught, over $480,000 in revenue was at
risk because refiling windows had closed for many claims.
Lessons Learned:
- Never
assume coding rules are the same for in-person and telehealth visits.
- Have
a payer-specific rules chart that includes emerging care models.
- Run monthly
denial pattern reports—don’t wait for year-end reviews.
Failure Story #2: The Orthopedic Modifier Meltdown
Background:
An orthopedic group regularly performed procedures that required modifier -59
for distinct procedural service.
A new coder, fresh from school, applied modifier -51 instead.
What Happened:
- At
first, claims got paid—but the insurer’s audit team flagged the
error during a post-payment review.
- Result:
$312,000 in recoupments and the practice was placed on prepayment
review for 18 months.
- Prepayment
review meant delays of 45+ days before any reimbursement came
through, killing cash flow.
Lessons Learned:
- Not
all modifiers are interchangeable—the wrong one can trigger audits.
- Internal
audits should catch modifier usage errors before the payer does.
- Always
train new staff on specialty-specific billing quirks.
Failure Story #3: The Rural Health Clinic Documentation
Disaster
Background:
A small rural clinic had one person doing everything—scheduling, coding,
billing. She was beloved by patients but had zero formal coding training.
What Happened:
- She
billed high-level E/M codes for complex chronic care patients—accurately
in terms of time spent.
- Unfortunately,
her documentation lacked medical necessity justification (no
detailed ROS, exam notes, or treatment rationale).
- A
Medicaid audit disallowed 72% of claims reviewed.
- The
clinic had to repay $186,000, nearly bankrupting it.
Lessons Learned:
- Documentation
drives payment—time spent alone isn’t enough.
- Even
small clinics need periodic external audits to ensure compliance.
- Love
from patients won’t protect you from payer scrutiny.
Myth-Busting the Billing vs. Coding Relationship
These failures often come from beliefs that sound
reasonable but are dead wrong. Let’s bust some of the biggest ones.
Myth #1: “If the coder gets it right, billing will take
care of itself.”
Reality:
Even perfect coding can be ruined by billing errors—wrong payer ID, missed
filing deadline, missing authorization.
Fix: Create a final review checkpoint before claims go out.
Myth #2: “If the claim was paid, it must have been
right.”
Reality:
Paid claims can be clawed back years later during audits. Many
post-payment reviews specifically look for modifier misuse and lack
of medical necessity.
Fix: Audit paid claims, not just denials.
Myth #3: “We don’t need a denial management process—our
denial rate is low.”
Reality:
A low denial rate might mean your team isn’t even submitting borderline claims
they’re entitled to. You could be leaving money on the table.
Fix: Measure both denial prevention and denial recovery
performance.
Myth #4: “We’re too small for payers to notice us.”
Reality:
Auditors don’t care about your size—they care about patterns. If your error
rate crosses a certain threshold, you’re on the radar.
Fix: Adopt big-practice compliance habits, even if you’re a solo
provider.
Myth #5: “Billing software will catch everything.”
Reality:
Software catches format errors, not logic errors. A scrubber can tell
you a CPT code is valid, but it can’t tell you if it’s justified by the
documentation.
Fix: Pair technology with human oversight.
Pulling the Lessons Together
From these stories and myths, one theme is crystal clear:
The gap between coding and billing is not a minor inconvenience—it’s a
high-risk, high-cost vulnerability.
What the best-run practices do differently:
- Formalize
the handoff — every claim passes through a structured, documented
review between coder and biller.
- Invest
in training — not just at hire, but ongoing, especially when payer
rules or codes change.
- Audit
before it hurts — monthly internal reviews to catch problems before
payers do.
- Share
denial data openly — no shame, just solutions.
- Empower
staff to question — billers can query coders, coders can push back on
providers, and nobody takes it personally.
Key Takeaway From Section 4:
Mistakes are costly, but preventable—if you stop treating
billing and coding as separate silos.
Instead, think of them as two halves of the same revenue engine. If one
side misfires, the whole thing stalls.
Section 5: The Future of Billing–Coding Integration — AI,
Automation & Compliance in 2025 and Beyond
The healthcare revenue cycle has never been static, but in
2025 it’s changing faster than ever.
Artificial intelligence, payer-driven automation, and tightening compliance
rules are converging—forcing providers to rethink how coding and billing
work together.
If Section 4 was about avoiding past mistakes, this
section is about future-proofing your workflow.
1. AI as the New “First Pass” Reviewer
AI isn’t replacing coders or billers any time soon—but it is
becoming their smartest assistant.
What AI is Already Doing Well:
- Chart
summarization: Pulling diagnoses, procedures, and key documentation
from EMRs.
- Predictive
coding suggestions: Offering CPT/ICD-10 candidates based on the note.
- Modifier
prompts: Flagging when payer rules suggest a specific modifier.
- Denial
pattern recognition: Using historical claim data to warn of likely
rejections before submission.
Example:
A mid-sized ENT group in Illinois implemented an AI coding review tool. In the
first 90 days:
- Denials
dropped 21% for high-complexity visits.
- Manual
review time per claim fell from 6 minutes to 2.5 minutes.
- Coders
used saved time for provider documentation training, further
reducing errors.
2. Automation in Claim Scrubbing and Submission
Traditional claim scrubbers look for format and code-set
validity errors.
The new generation goes further by integrating payer-specific logic.
Capabilities of Modern Scrubbers:
- Real-time
payer edits — rules update automatically from clearinghouses or
payers.
- Cross-check
with LCD/NCD — warns if documentation may not meet coverage criteria.
- Dynamic
work queues — routes high-risk claims for extra review while
fast-tracking clean claims.
The Benefit:
Instead of every claim going through the same slow approval pipeline, resources
focus on problem cases, speeding up cash flow.
3. Compliance Pressure: The OIG, CMS, and Private Payers
Get Aggressive
2025 has brought more frequent and broader audits—not
just for fraud, but for error patterns that indicate potential
overpayment.
Three Key Compliance Trends:
- Shorter
appeal windows — some payers now give as little as 30 days to
appeal denials.
- Telehealth
re-audits — post-pandemic, payers are revisiting 2020–2023 telehealth
claims for modifier compliance and medical necessity.
- E/M
level justification — audits increasingly focus on whether
documentation supports the billed level, even when time-based coding is
used.
Action Step:
Build audit readiness into your daily workflow:
- Keep supporting
documentation attached to the claim in the EMR.
- Maintain
a rolling six-month internal audit on random samples.
- Track
recoupment risks in your denial dashboard—not just current
rejections.
4. The New Model: Integrated Revenue Integrity Teams
Forward-thinking practices are merging coding, billing,
and compliance into a single Revenue Integrity Unit.
Why It Works:
- Coders
see denial patterns and adjust documentation guidance.
- Billers
understand clinical coding decisions and can defend them in appeals.
- Compliance
officers ensure both sides are audit-ready.
Case Study:
A multi-specialty group in Florida restructured into a Revenue Integrity team.
In the first year:
- Denial
overturn rate improved from 18% to 42%.
- Audit
error rate dropped below 2%.
- Provider
satisfaction rose because queries were resolved in hours, not days.
5. Key Technology to Watch in the Next 3 Years
Here’s what will likely define the billing–coding
landscape through 2028:
|
Technology |
Impact |
Readiness Level |
|
NLP (Natural Language Processing) for real-time
coding prompts |
Reduces manual code lookup; helps with complex specialties |
Already widely adopted |
|
Machine Learning Denial Prediction |
Flags risky claims before submission |
Early mainstream |
|
Blockchain-based claim tracking |
Secure, transparent audit trail across payers |
Early pilot stage |
|
Automated Prior Authorization |
Cuts days/weeks from pre-approval time |
Expanding rapidly in payers’ own portals |
|
AI-driven provider documentation coaching |
Real-time pop-ups guiding provider charting |
Emerging but promising |
6. Practical Integration Strategies for 2025
Even without expensive AI tools, you can integrate
billing and coding more tightly today:
- Daily
huddles — 10–15 minutes for billers and coders to review top denials
and urgent claims.
- Shared
dashboards — both teams see the same claim status data in real time.
- Cross-training
— billers learn basic coding principles, coders learn payer claim flow.
- Standardized
queries — no informal “Hey, can you fix this?”—use templates that
capture the reason, payer, and urgency.
- Payer-specific
playbooks — short, updated guides for each insurer, accessible to
everyone.
7. The Human Factor: Culture Eats Process for Breakfast
You can have the best tools in the world, but if coders
and billers see each other as separate camps, integration will fail.
Signs of a Healthy Billing–Coding Culture:
- Zero
blame-shifting; problems are addressed jointly.
- Shared
success metrics (e.g., days in A/R, first-pass yield).
- Open
feedback loops—queries are welcomed, not resented.
8. Looking Ahead — Your Competitive Advantage
The practices that win in the next five years will be those
that:
- Treat
billing and coding as one continuous workflow.
- Invest
in both technology and training.
- Build
audit-proof processes into daily operations.
- Foster
a team identity that values revenue integrity over speed alone.
In other words, your future depends on integration,
transparency, and adaptability—the three traits AI can enhance, but only
humans can lead.
Key Takeaway From Section 5:
AI and automation are changing the game, but they’re not a
magic fix.
The real breakthrough comes when technology + integrated teams + compliance
discipline work together.
About the Author
Dr. Daniel Cham is a physician and medical consultant with
expertise in medical technology, healthcare management, and medical billing. He
focuses on delivering practical insights that help professionals navigate
complex challenges at the intersection of healthcare and medical practice.
Connect with Dr. Cham on LinkedIn to learn more: linkedin.com/in/daniel-cham-md-669036285
Hashtags
#MedicalBilling #MedicalCoding #RevenueCycleManagement
#HealthcareCompliance #DenialPrevention #AIinHealthcare #PracticeManagement
#HealthIT #RevenueIntegrity #MedicalBillingTips #HealthcareFinance
#MedicalPracticeGrowth #CodingAccuracy #BillingAndCoding #RCM
References (August 2025)
- Medicare
proposes 3.8% payment increase for 2026 — Summary of the proposed CMS
Physician Fee Schedule adjustments. Read here
- Potential
shake-up in Medicare payment systems — Discussion on how political and
economic forces may reshape reimbursement structures. Read here
- Automation
and AI trends in billing & coding — Insights on technology’s
growing role in healthcare revenue cycles. Read here
No comments:
Post a Comment