By Cyber Sense Billing Team · Published · Updated
Direct answer: reconcile the episode, not just the aging balance
Postoperative accounts receivable review should connect each open balance to the original surgery, related encounters, submitted claims, and remittance activity. A balance does not necessarily represent collectible revenue. It may reflect included postoperative care, an unposted payment, an incorrect adjustment, a denied exception, or a claim still awaiting action. CMS’s global surgery booklet helps distinguish the Medicare surgical package from potentially separate services, while Medicare appeal guidance helps determine how disputed determinations should be routed. Begin by classifying the reason the balance exists. Rebilling every postoperative account or adjusting every global-period denial obscures the difference between a valid receivable and an internal accounting problem.
Build an episode ledger that explains the balance
An episode ledger should show the operation date, procedures, global indicators, responsible practitioners, postoperative encounters, and any care transfer. Add claim identifiers, adjudication dates, payments, adjustments, secondary activity, and unresolved actions. This can be a focused reconciliation view rather than a new clinical system. The objective is to explain how the current balance arose and what evidence supports the next action. Avoid a single status such as insurance pending when the account actually contains several distinct issues. A payment posting discrepancy belongs with reconciliation staff; a disputed unrelated E/M exception belongs with coding and denial review. Clear classification prevents repeated follow-up that cannot resolve the underlying problem.
Hypothetical scenario: three balances after one operation
A hypothetical shoulder surgery episode has three open items. The first is a routine recovery visit charged separately. The second is a documented evaluation of an unrelated condition that denied under a postoperative edit. The third is a surgery payment received by the practice but not matched to the correct claim. These balances should not receive the same action. Review the first against the surgical package and correct the account under approved procedures if the charge was included. Review the second for a supported exception and the proper correction or appeal route. Reconcile the third to the remittance and deposit records. Sending three identical payer inquiries would leave the central work unfinished.
Checklist for postoperative A/R reconciliation
Work from source records rather than the aging report alone. The reconciliation should leave an explanation, an accountable owner, and a dated next action for each unresolved item. Any proposed adjustment should follow the practice’s approval policy, and any patient balance should be reviewed against adjudication and applicable responsibility rules rather than used as a convenient destination for unexplained amounts.
- Link each open line to the surgery and verify its global-period relationship.
- Match submitted claims, remittances, payments, adjustments, reversals, and secondary transactions.
- Identify included services separately from supported exceptions and unrelated claim issues.
- Check whether transfer-of-care reporting affects the episode’s expected claim structure.
- Distinguish missing payment posting from actual nonpayment or an unresolved denial.
- Determine the correct correction, reopening, appeal, or accounting action.
- Verify patient responsibility before statements or collection activity.
- Record the rationale, approval when needed, responsible staff member, and next review date.
Mistakes that make postoperative aging unreliable
Repeatedly submitting unchanged claims can create duplicate activity without resolving a global edit. Applying a blanket adjustment to all postoperative denials can conceal separately supportable services or posting mistakes. Another error is treating an expected global package amount as established without confirming actual adjudication, contractual terms, and any transfer arrangement. Staff may also close the professional account while leaving an unmatched credit or secondary transaction elsewhere in the episode. These are different reconciliation problems and need different evidence. Finally, payment on a past claim should not be used as proof that the same charge was correctly reported. Correctness requires review of the service and applicable rules, not merely the presence of cash.
Follow a recovery across episodes before closing the balance
A payer recovery can affect an older surgical claim while appearing on a remittance containing unrelated current services. If staff net the recovery against current receipts without preserving its origin, both episodes may become misleading. Hypothetically, a payer deducts $250 associated with an earlier shoulder operation from a payment batch that includes a recent knee operation. Match the recovery reference to the original shoulder claim and determination, then record the resulting balance and next action on that episode. Do not reopen the knee balance merely because its payment shared the deposit. Review whether the recovery requires posting correction, contractual analysis, or a dispute under the applicable process. Validate the entries by reconstructing both episode balances before and after the transaction and reconciling the batch to the deposit. Preserve the original payment, recovery, and any later replacement as distinct events. This makes the financial history understandable without treating every deduction as a new collectible patient balance.
Payer limits and the next reconciliation meeting
Medicare’s global package framework does not establish every payer’s allowed amount, contractual adjustment, patient liability, or appeal process. Verify those elements from the actual agreement, remittance, and policy. For Medicare fee-for-service disputes, separate minor corrections from redetermination and calendar any applicable appeal deadline from the determination, not from the next monthly A/R meeting. As the next step, select a manageable group of completed surgical episodes and reconcile them across coding, payment posting, and follow-up staff. Categorize the causes before discussing financial totals. The goal is an explainable ledger and a correct next action; do not claim recovered revenue or improved collection rates without measured, attributable results.
Frequently asked questions
Should every postoperative denial be written off as global?
No. Review whether the service was included, whether a documented exception applies, and whether the balance instead reflects posting or claim-processing problems. A blanket adjustment can conceal both legitimate receivables and internal errors.
Can an unresolved postoperative balance be transferred to the patient?
Not simply because insurer follow-up has stalled. Verify the adjudication, coverage circumstances, contractual obligations, and applicable responsibility rules. Resolve unexplained posting or coding issues before treating a balance as collectible patient responsibility.
Sources and further reading
Related pages
Need help with orthopedics billing? See our Orthopedics medical billing services.
Related articles
This article is general information, not legal or coding advice. Always check current CPT®, ICD-10-CM, CMS and payer guidance. Questions? Contact us.