Actual vs Documented Advance Care Planning in a Primary Care Clinic.

Abstract

Advance care planning (ACP) is a complex and multifaceted entity that has significant impact on patient care. ACP takes many forms, may be underbilled, and can have significant ramifications on quality care metrics. We performed a retrospective chart review for patients over 70 years in age in our family medicine resident clinic to evaluate the ways in which ACP is charted and the gap between billed and nonbilled ACP. The first 50 patients over 70 years in age seen between August 25, 2020 and September 25, 2020 were selected for standardized chart review. Billing for ACP was defined as Current Procedural Terminology codes=-10 codes 99497 or 99498. Primary outcomes were the percentage of patients with ACP and incidence of ACP documents. Secondary outcome was the proportion of documented ACP conversations in office visits which had billing for ACP. Forty-eight patients over 70 years in age were identified with an average age of 80.9 years old. Forty-one of 48 patients (85.4%) had some form of ACP and 12 (25%) had formal ACP documents. Of 25 patients with documented ACP conversations in office visits, eleven patients (44%) had ACP which had been formally billed. The majority of our patients had some form of ACP ranging from inpatient discussions of code status to outpatient visits regarding end-of-life care. However, ACP was underbilled in our practice. Physicians are often evaluated based on quality care metrics such as billed ACP which may not accurately reflect the work physicians are doing.