Analytical Results for Agricultural Soils Samples from a Monitoring Program Near Deer Trail, Colorado (USA)

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.G. Crock ◽  
D.B. Smith ◽  
T.J.B. Yager
Keyword(s):  
Agricultural Soils ◽  
Monitoring Program ◽  
Analytical Results

Tar ball frequency data and analytical results from a long-term beach monitoring program

2002 ◽  
Vol 44 (8) ◽  
pp. 770-780 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward H Owens ◽  
Gary S Mauseth ◽  
Colin A Martin ◽  
Alain Lamarche ◽  
John Brown
Keyword(s):  
Monitoring Program ◽  
Frequency Data ◽  
Analytical Results

scholarly journals Analytical results for minicipal biosolids samples from a monitoring program near Deer Trail, Colorado (U.S.A.) 2010

2011 ◽  
pp. i-24
Author(s):  
J.G. Crock ◽  
D.B. Smith ◽  
T.J.B. Yager ◽  
C.J. Berry ◽  
M.G. Adams
Keyword(s):  
Monitoring Program ◽  
Analytical Results

Dimensions of Multiskilling

1999 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carole E. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Service Delivery ◽  
Monitoring Program ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
School Age ◽  
Support Personnel ◽  
Educational Personnel ◽  
Educational Audiology ◽  
Children With Hearing Loss ◽  
Improve Service Delivery

Educational audiologists often must delegate certain tasks to other educational personnel who function as support personnel and need training in order to perform assigned tasks. Support personnel are people who, after appropriate training, perform tasks that are prescribed, directed, and supervised by a professional such as a certified and licensed audiologist. The training of support personnel to perform tasks that are typically performed by those in other disciplines is calledmultiskilling. This article discusses multiskilling and the use of support personnel in educational audiology in reference to the following principles: guidelines, models of multiskilling, components of successful multiskilling, and "dos and don’ts" for multiskilling. These principles are illustrated through the use of multiskilling in the establishment of a hearing aid monitoring program. Successful multiskilling and the use of support personnel by educational audiologists can improve service delivery to school-age children with hearing loss.

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

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 936-946
Author(s):  
Dawn Konrad-Martin ◽  
Neela Swanson ◽  
Angela Garinis
Keyword(s):  
Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Private Insurance ◽  
Monitoring Program ◽  
Current Method ◽  
International Classification Of Diseases ◽  
Ethical Practice ◽  
Party Payer ◽  
High Frequency Audiometry ◽  
Icd 10

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document