ACDIS CCDS-O Exam Questions

In outpatient risk adjustment, the highest-impact clarification is often the one that determines whether a condition is currently active (and therefore risk-adjustable) versus historical/resolved. ''Leukemia'' listed on the problem list, plus active review of CBC/WBC and referral to oncology, strongly suggests ongoing disease evaluation/management. ACDIS outpatient CDI principles emphasize querying to confirm whether the leukemia is active, in relapse, or in remission because that distinction can change code selection from an active malignancy to a history code, and history codes typically do not carry the same risk adjustment impact as an active HCC-bearing diagnosis. While heart failure type/acuity and malnutrition severity are also important for specificity and may affect risk capture, they generally represent refinement of already-established chronic conditions rather than a potential ''on/off'' determination of a major disease category. Likewise, atrial fibrillation subtype differentiation is clinically useful but usually does not materially change risk adjustment compared with confirming an active hematologic malignancy. Therefore, clarifying leukemia status/acuity is the most impactful risk-adjusted query opportunity.

Under CMS-HCC methodology, risk adjustment is driven by ICD-10-CM diagnoses that map to HCC categories and are supported as active conditions addressed at the encounter. CKD stage 3 is a classic HCC-qualifying chronic condition because it represents ongoing kidney disease severity and expected resource use, and in this note it is actively assessed with labs reviewed and a nephrology referral. A chronic non-pressure foot ulcer is also typically HCC-qualifying when documented as ongoing and requiring management, which is supported here by home care/wound assessment planning. In contrast, ''depression'' (without specification such as major depressive disorder severity/status) commonly does not qualify for HCC in the way major depressive/bipolar categories do, making it less reliable as a risk-adjusting diagnosis. Likewise, ''renal failure'' is nonspecific and potentially conflicting with CKD stage 3; CDI best practice would be to clarify acuity/severity (acute kidney injury vs CKD stage vs ESRD) rather than assume ''renal failure'' as an HCC driver. Therefore, the validated HCC-qualifying pair is CKD 3 and chronic non-pressure ulcer.

In outpatient clinical documentation and chart review, diabetes can be supported by recognized diagnostic thresholds. An HbA1c value reflects average blood glucose over approximately the prior 2--3 months and is commonly used to diagnose and monitor diabetes. An HbA1c 6.5% (when confirmed per clinical practice standards and interpreted in the appropriate clinical context) supports a diagnosis of diabetes; therefore an HbA1c of 7.0% clearly meets the threshold and supports diabetes. By comparison, a 2-hour OGTT value of 90 mg/dL is normal and does not support diabetes (diabetes is typically supported when the 2-hour value is 200 mg/dL). Hypoglycemia is low blood glucose and is not diagnostic of diabetes; it may occur in diabetics due to treatment but can also occur in non-diabetics for many reasons. A fasting glucose of 100 mg/dL is at most borderline/prediabetes range and does not meet diagnostic criteria for diabetes (diabetes is supported at 126 mg/dL).

When documentation states ''metastatic uterine cancer,'' the most important missing element for complete, accurate outpatient coding is where the cancer has metastasized (the secondary site[s]). In ambulatory CDI, identifying secondary sites best clarifies the full scope of disease being monitored and treated because metastatic disease coding relies on documenting both the primary malignancy and the specific metastatic location(s) (e.g., lung, liver, bone, peritoneum, lymph nodes). This supports correct severity representation, risk capture, treatment intent, and medical necessity for ongoing chemotherapy follow-up. While tumor morphology can be clinically relevant, it is usually established earlier in the diagnostic pathway and does not, by itself, define current metastatic burden. Likewise, reviewing labs or MRI results may provide supportive indicators, but they do not replace provider documentation of the confirmed metastatic sites being managed. A compliant query focused on secondary sites prompts the provider to document the current metastatic disease status (active, responding, progressing) and specific locations, which most directly identifies the conditions under treatment.

The definition in option B is the official Uniform Hospital Discharge Data Set (UHDDS) definition used for inpatient coding: the principal diagnosis is the condition determined---after evaluation---to be chiefly responsible for the admission. It is not simply the first condition written, nor necessarily the ''worst'' or most severe condition; it is the reason for admission once the workup clarifies the clinical picture. CDI practice reinforces this because principal diagnosis selection drives DRG assignment, quality metrics, and reporting, and errors often stem from confusing presenting symptoms with the final established diagnosis. Although outpatient settings use different concepts (e.g., first-listed diagnosis for the encounter), ACDIS education frequently contrasts inpatient ''principal diagnosis'' with outpatient ''first-listed'' to prevent documentation and coding misalignment. Clinicians should document the definitive condition when known (and link symptoms to that condition), and clearly describe diagnostic uncertainty when not yet established. This clarity supports compliant coding, accurate benchmarking, and defensible medical necessity across settings.