Email is a wonderful thing. As a kid, or even as an adult, I rarely wrote letters because the act of addressing an envelope was too much for me. (Please don’t judge me too harshly!) But I whip off emails to friends all the time. While I love email, it comes with two very different perils. Neither constitutes “breaking news” but I see enough problems with both that it is worth an article. The first problem is well-publicized: phishing.
I received an email from someone who has appeared on Monitor Monday. I recognized her name immediately. The email started “I was meant to get this to you last week. Here is the presentation to collaborate on the new …” That isn’t a typo; the email started with flawed grammar. I am glad it did because it made my spidey-sense tingle. We’ve all heard the instruction not to open attachments from an unknown sender, but this email highlights another problem, attachments from someone you DO know. Fortunately, the author made a foolish error. The email referred to our prior discussion. We hadn’t had one. But if we had, there’s a real risk I would have opened the attachment. One of the lessons I’ve learned as we try to train people to avoid phishing is that it is extraordinarily difficult to train people to be sufficiently skeptical of attachments. Antivirus software will help, but we’re going to have to keep hammering home the message that attachments are always suspect. The fact that you know the sender doesn’t eliminate the risk. Pay careful attention to the message. Make sure it is specific to you. Had the author been smart enough to structure the note as an “introduction,” with no reference to past interaction but asking me to review a document, maybe I would have been fooled. Another key point: if you doubt the authenticity of an email, don’t call the number in the signature block. Smart phishers use a burner number and have someone answer the phone. Google the person and use that number. Here, the person’s real number was one digit different than the number in the email. I didn’t try the number in the message, but it would surprise me if someone purporting to be the author’s assistant would have answered.
The second email risk is discussed in news stories about the recent $678 million-dollar settlement paid by Novartis, Apparently, as part of their compliance training, employees were told to refrain from writing things down. The advice was that rather than send an email, make a phone call. I’ve certainly been known to say something similar. The government focused on that instruction to suggest that compliance was less focused on following the law than on covering up improper activity. Now, one lesson someone could draw from this experience is “don’t write down your instruction not to write things down.” While that’s sort of fun to say, I would suggest a slightly different lesson. Be careful about what you write down. When I give compliance advice to clients, I’m not trying to help them avoid the detection of illegal activity. I’m trying to help them avoid committing an illegal act. When I issue advice to refrain from writing an email, that doesn’t stem from a fear that truth will be discovered, I worry about a poorly worded statement or a cavalier, sarcastic remark being used against you. Gallows humor can lead to metaphorical gallows. For example, the oft-used “I don’t look good in stripes” is usually uttered by someone trying to do the right thing, but it can sound like an admission of wrongdoing. If you’re putting it in writing, think about how it can look when quoted out of context. How can it be twisted? Once said electronically, there are no take-backs.
Programming Note: David Glaser is a permanent panelist on Monitor Mondays. Listen to her live reporting every Monday at 10 a.m. EST.
Directly contradicting another person can carry the potential to feel antagonistic or rude. But in the realm of compliance, it’s also often necessary. Rules are
EDITOR’S NOTE: Gloryanne Bryant has more than 40 years of experience in her field and is an independent HIM Coding and CDI Consultant who works
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
Sepsis sequencing continues to challenge even experienced coding and CDI professionals, with evolving guidelines, documentation gaps, and payer scrutiny driving denials and data inconsistencies. In this webcast, Payal Sinha, MBA, RHIA, CCDS, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, CCDS-O, CRC, CRCR, provides clear guideline-based strategies to accurately code sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock, assign POA indicators, clarify the relationship between infection and organ dysfunction, and align documentation across teams. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen audit defensibility, improve first-pass accuracy, support appeal success, reduce denials, and ensure accurate quality reporting, empowering organizations to achieve consistent, compliant sepsis coding outcomes.
Expert presenters Kathy Pride, RHIT, CPC, CCS-P, CPMA, and Brandi Russell, RHIA, CCS, COC, CPMA, break down complex fracture care coding rules, walk through correct modifier application (-25, -57, 54, 55), and clarify sequencing for initial and subsequent encounters. Attendees will gain the practical knowledge needed to submit clean claims, ensure compliance, and stay one step ahead of payer audits in 2026.
Accurately determining the principal diagnosis is critical for compliant billing, appropriate reimbursement, and valid quality reporting — yet it remains one of the most subjective and error-prone areas in inpatient coding. In this expert-led session, Cheryl Ericson, RN, MS, CCDS, CDIP, demystifies the complexities of principal diagnosis assignment, bridging the gap between coding rules and clinical reality. Learn how to strengthen your organization’s coding accuracy, reduce denials, and ensure your documentation supports true medical necessity.
Denials continue to delay reimbursement, increase administrative burden, and threaten financial stability across healthcare organizations. This essential webcast tackles the root causes—rising payer scrutiny, fragmented workflows, inconsistent documentation, and underused analytics—and offers proven, data-driven strategies to prevent and overturn denials. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen documentation and coding accuracy, engage clinicians effectively, and leverage predictive analytics and AI to identify risks before they impact revenue. Through real-world case examples and actionable guidance, this session empowers coding, CDI, and revenue cycle professionals to shift from reactive appeals to proactive denial prevention and revenue protection.
In this timely session, Stacey Shillito, CDIP, CPMA, CCS, CCS-P, CPEDC, COPC, breaks down the complexities of Medical Decision Making (MDM) documentation so providers can confidently capture the true complexity of their care. Attendees will learn practical, efficient strategies to ensure documentation aligns with current E/M guidelines, supports accurate coding, and reduces audit risk, all without adding to charting time.
Join Ronald Hirsch, MD, FACP, CHCQM for The PEPPER Returns – Risk and Opportunity at Your Fingertips, a practical webcast that demystifies the PEPPER and shows you how to turn complex claims data into actionable insights. Dr. Hirsch will explain how to interpret key measures, identify compliance risks, uncover missed revenue opportunities, and understand new updates in the PEPPER, all to help your organization stay ahead of audits and use this powerful data proactively.
Stay ahead of the 2026-2027 audit surge with “Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue,” a high-impact webcast led by Michael Calahan, PA, MBA. This concise session gives hospitals and physicians clear insight into the most likely federal audit targets, such as E/M services, split/shared and critical care, observation and admissions, device credits, and Two-Midnight Rule changes, and shows how to tighten documentation, coding, and internal processes to reduce denials, recoupments, and penalties. Attendees walk away with practical best practices to protect revenue, strengthen compliance, and better prepare their teams for inevitable audits.
As AI reshapes healthcare compliance, the risk of biased outputs and opaque decision-making grows. This webcast, led by Frank Cohen, delivers a practical Four-Pillar Governance Framework—Transparency, Accountability, Fairness, and Explainability—to help you govern AI-driven claim auditing with confidence. Learn how to identify and mitigate bias, implement robust human oversight, and document defensible AI review processes that regulators and auditors will accept. Discover concrete remedies, from rotation protocols to uncertainty scoring, and actionable steps to evaluate vendors before contracts are signed. In a regulatory landscape that moves faster than ever, gain the tools to stay compliant, defend your processes, and reduce liability while maintaining operational effectiveness.
Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Decoding Social Admissions’ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 1 with code CYBER25
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24
