Is the billing rise due simply to more efficient documentation, or is it inadvertent or conscious fraud? Or, perhaps, something more nuanced?
IMO, there's a disconnect in this article between the increased billing on the one hand, and the EHR "point and click" templating, on the other. As they say in the sciences, correlation doesn't equal causation. E.g., there have always been docs who like to speed up their documentation using templates, or a sort of "memorized" H&P; all MTs have seen (well, heard) these, and shaken their heads in dismay to hear a hasty, sloppy dictation of an obviously perfunctory exam. I wonder whether having a templated EHR actually increases the number of docs willing to take that sort of shortcut, or just makes it quicker to do it.
... And it's all a separate issue from what I think is the dreadful harm potentially done to the clarity, accuracy, and personalization of the medical record with the use of these point-and-click things; one hears that many physicians don't care for them much, either.
...But the latter is an MT problem, not a coding problem. This potential "up-coding", whether deliberate or not, could become a coding problem. I don't know enough about coding yet to have any notion what, if anything, should be done; but it's good to be aware of these whirlpools of controversy swirling ahead of us...