The industry's trusted authority on overturning denials and payer audits — equipping providers with the expertise, resources, and community to challenge unfair practices, recover rightful revenue, and drive lasting change in healthcare reimbursement.
AHDAM speaks for the people doing the work — pushing back on payer practices that erode reimbursement, surfacing patterns across hospitals, and partnering with policy bodies to drive change.
119+ tip sheets, templates, policies, and 50 state-by-state legal snippets — searchable by denial type, payer, and clinical scenario. Two decades of practitioner-tested guidance.
Live sessions and on-demand recordings from the appeal professionals who've done it. Clinical validation. DRG downgrades. Prior auth strategy. Ask-the-experts Q&A built in.
AHDAM Appeal Management Certification — the credential that proves you can do this work. Curriculum, exam, continuing education, all in one pathway.
AHDAM is proud to announce a strategic partnership with Hyve Health. Our shared mission is to strengthen the healthcare community's ability to prevent manage, and overturn insurance denials.
HYVE brings advanced analytics and tranparency tools, like the Payer Vitality Scorecard™, empowering providers to track and respond to shifting payer behavior.
Partners →
PayerWatch is on a mission to ensure every hospital in the U.S. is fully capable of defending themselves against egregious payer behavior. That's a mission we at AHDAM can get behind!
Through sophisticated software and world-class appeal solutions PayerWatch is holding payers accountable and protecting provider revenue like no one else in healthcare today.
Partners →AHDAM is the only place I've found where the appeal letters, the legal precedent, and the people who've actually overturned these denials all live in one room.
I've written hospital appeals for 15 years. By far the most practical training I've ever taken — clinically grounded, legally informed, and immediately useful Monday morning.
The Minnesota ACDIS chapter learned an enormous amount. Conversational, candid, and packed with strategy we can deploy that day.
Founded AHDAM to put practitioner intelligence in every appeal professional's hands. Two decades in healthcare denial & appeal management.
Senior Fellow in Hospital Medicine. Leads clinical & physician-advisor programming, peer-to-peer strategy, and the certification curriculum.
AHDAM's board brings together healthcare attorneys, physician advisors, and revenue cycle leaders from health systems nationwide.
Become a member, get certified, or ask the appeal experts — three ways into the AHDAM community.
August 18, 2026
Satisfaction with Medicare Advantage plans has declined for the second straight year as enrollees expect insurers to be more of a partner in their care, according to a new study from JD Power.
This article was originally published on Fierce Healthcare.
August 18, 2026
The organization said the agency responded to its concerns about payers’ implementation of the transparency provisions of the 2024 final rule.
This article was originally published on Fierce Healthcare.
August 18, 2026
Humata’s AI-powered solution has allowed physicians to achieve a 96% first-pass approval rate while reducing write-offs by 30%, executives say.
This article was originally published on Fierce Healthcare.
August 17, 2026
UnitedHealthcare, Network Health and Aetna are among the first group of health plans to go live with the API, while Ochsner Health, Froedtert ThedaCare Health, Denver Health and Summit Health are the four health systems now using the real-time prior auth checks.
This article was originally published on Fierce Healthcare.
Author: Cheryl Ericson, RN, MS, CCDS, CDIP | August 17, 2026
Few diagnostic categories draw more denial activity right now than kidney diseases. Acute kidney injury (AKI), acute tubular necrosis (ATN), and chronic kidney disease (CKD) each carry their own documentation traps.
Payers have become fluent in exploiting the gaps between them to support issuing a denial. What makes this particularly frustrating is that there is clinical agreement on how to identify these conditions and clear coding guidelines, but AKI and ATN remain auditing targets.
The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2012 Clinical Practice Guideline remains the operative definition of AKI, and it is deliberately simple: a serum creatinine rise of at least 0.3 mg/dL within 48 hours, a rise to at least 1.5 times baseline within 7 days, or urine output below 0.5 mL/kg/h for 6 hours. Any one of the three is sufficient. However, I continue to see payers argue that AKI criteria “do not apply” until a patient has been adequately rehydrated, effectively demanding that the diagnosis prove itself twice.
This conflates two separate clinical questions. Whether AKI was present at the moment the criteria are met is not the same question as which subtype of AKI the patient has: prerenal, which codes to AKI, or intrinsic injury such as ATN. KDIGO criteria do not require these values to persist after fluid resuscitation before the diagnosis of AKI is valid. Fluid resuscitation is the primary treatment for AKI, which requires supportive measures and the avoidance of nephrotoxins.
A rapid, complete response to fluids does not retroactively erase kidney injury; it identifies the injury as prerenal rather than intrinsic (i.e., ATN). That distinction matters clinically, and it belongs in the documentation, but it is a question of etiology, not of whether the diagnosis of AKI or ATN is valid.
ATN, also referred to as acute tubular injury (ATI), is a form of intrinsic (renal) AKI that is characteristically persistent (AHA Coding Clinic 2nd Quarter 2026 p. 5). True ATN takes 72 hours or longer to resolve even with adequate fluid resuscitation because the sloughed tubular epithelium must regenerate. That is a real, evidence-based way to differentiate AKI from ATN. Because kidney biopsy is rarely pursued clinically, there is no true non-invasive gold standard for diagnosing ATN.
The most effective non-invasive strategy for identifying ATN is the Perazella-Coca urine sediment scoring system (Perazella et al., Clin J Am Soc Nephrol, 2008;3(6):1615-1619), in which a score of 2 or higher (based on granular casts and renal tubular epithelial cells) is described as an extremely strong predictor of ATN, carrying a positive predictive value of 100 percent in patients with a high pretest probability of the diagnosis. However, this is a manual process that is rarely performed because most hospitals rely on automated urine analyzers, which are poorly suited to identifying granular casts and renal tubular epithelial cells.
A nephrologist’s manual read of the urinalysis can reach the correct diagnosis of ATN over 90 percent of the time compared with just 19 percent when relying on the standard automated lab report. In practice applying this scoring system reliably requires a nephrology consultation and a clinician willing to personally examine the sediment, which is not something a treating hospitalist can expect from a routine urinalysis.
All of this to say that when appealing a denial for ATN, CDI professionals should push back if the payer cites a lack of cellular evidence, including muddy brown casts. Research has also shown that these casts may be absent in up to 30% of patients with ATN. The absence of cellular evidence should never be used to exclude the diagnosis of ATN.
CKD presents a different kind of documentation discipline. Per the FY 2027 ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines, Section I.C.14.a.1, CKD must be staged 1 through 5 or documented as end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and that stage must come from the provider, not from a coder or CDI specialist reading a GFR off a lab report. Coding CKD without a stage understates how sick the patient is, but documentation of “chronic renal insufficiency” is worse. If the provider were to drop the word “chronic,” the term maps to N28.9, which is not even a CKD code.
Where this gets genuinely interesting is the boundary between Stage 5 CKD and ESRD. Both describe a GFR under 15 mL/min. The difference on paper is whether the patient requires ongoing dialysis. N18.5 is reported for Stage 5 without dialysis, but N18.6 plus Z99.2 (Dependence on renal dialysis) for ESRD. But this is not merely a coding nuance; it is a Medicare eligibility trigger. Under Section 226A of the Social Security Act, a documented diagnosis of ESRD certified on the CMS-2728 Medical Evidence Report allows an individual of any age to become entitled to premium-free Medicare Part A.
If a patient has started maintenance dialysis, the documentation should reflect ESRD, not “Stage 5 CKD,” and CDI professionals should understand why that distinction carries weight well beyond the inpatient claim.
It is also possible for a patient to have both CKD and AKI superimposed on it. However, there is no “acute on chronic renal failure” combination code in ICD-10-CM. Per Guideline I.C.9.a.2 and I.C.9.a.3, when hypertensive CKD and acute renal failure are both present, the acute renal failure must also be coded, sequenced according to the reason for the encounter.
Another common argument is that a patient cannot have AKI in the setting of ESRD because these patients are unable to produce urine. ESRD is defined by GFR/dialysis-dependence, not by anuria. Per the United States Renal Data System (USRDS) only 15% of patients starting dialysis in 2020 had an eGFR below 5 mL/min/1.73m². The substantial majority of those with ESRD retain meaningful residual kidney function that can range from oliguria to normal urine output levels. However, elevated lab values in the setting of ESRD do not equate to AKI if the patient has missed or was unable to complete their regular dialysis schedule. This scenario is associated with fluid overload (and hyperkalemia) not AKI.
AKI on ESRD requires a new insult to the kidneys (e.g., infection, hypotension, nephrotoxic exposure, obstruction) that worsens the patient’s residual function or urine output from their individual baseline. This is why KDIGO’s definition requires a change from the patient’s baseline, whatever that baseline is. CDI and coding professionals can use past serum creatinine levels to try to establish a baseline if the patient has frequent visits to the facility when querying the provider for clarification.
What ties all this together is not clinical complexity; it is discipline in going back to the primary source rather than accepting a payer’s paraphrase of it. KDIGO says what it says about fluid resuscitation. The Official Guidelines say what they say about staging and dual coding. CMS’s own ESRD entitlement provisions say what they say about who qualifies for Medicare and why.
When a denial letter reinterprets any of these, the correct response is not a clinical argument about the patient’s course; it is the guideline’s actual language, quoted back. Renal disease coding will keep drawing scrutiny as kidney diseases continue climbing in the Medicare inpatient volume.
The programs that hold their ground will be the ones that treat the primary sources as non-negotiable, not the ones that quietly adjust their documentation and coding to satisfy the payer.
This article was originally published on RACmonitor.
Author: Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC | August 17, 2026
As this summer comes to an end, we look forward to the cooler weather of fall. Oct. 1 is right around the corner. Before you grab that first pumpkin spice latte, make sure you and your coding team are aware of the changes in the fiscal year (FY) 27 Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS) Final Rule.
Here is a big picture overview to give you some ideas of what you need to know.
For the ICD-10-CM codes, we had 190 code additions and 30 code deletions. We also had three new major complication comorbidity (MCC) condition additions for pulmonary mycetoma, prevesical abscess and other pelvic abscess. If you do obstetric coding, you will want to review the new code sets for specific types of ectopic pregnancies.
There are also have new codes covering all trimesters for vanishing twin syndrome. There is a new code for gender identity disorder in remission as well as new personal history codes identifying various stages of gender transition.
Coders also need to be aware that we had an expansion of the low body mass index (BMI) value code, Z68.1. Two new codes now identify a BMI value of 18.4 or less or 18.5-19.9. These new codes will remain CC conditions.
For the ICD-10-PCS codes, there are 101 new code additions and 38 code deletions. There isa new code set for procedures for division of the aortic or mitral valves. There are also new spinal fusion codes that identify the use of custom-made anatomically and virtually designed interbody fusion devices. We also have new codes for procedures involving the use of an Impeller pump, new wound management modalities, as well as several new computer-aided technologies. There are new codes for urinary filtration using selective cytopheretic that will be non-OR procedures affecting the MS-DRG assignment.
Looking at the FY27 new technologies, it is important coders know which ones are discontinued, which previous ones are still considered new and which ones have had add-on payments approved for this fiscal year. Prior to the Oct. 1 implementation, which is only a few weeks away, coders should review these lists.
This is vital to educate themselves and their team on which codes to be assigning to ensure to capture that additional payment. Remember these new technology add-on payments (NTAPs) are in addition to the MS-DRG reimbursement. ZEVASKYN, one of this year’s approved new technologies, has an add-on payment of more than two- million dollars!
Don’t forget about the MS-DRG changes of which all coders need to be aware. This year there are changes in MDC 05, 08, 10, 11, 12 and 13. Two new MS-DRGs were created for hip or knee procedures with periprosthetic joint infections. Other changes involve extensive or complex spinal fusions, cardiac pacemaker revision or replacements and prostatectomies.
Also important to note, the annual review of procedure codes in DRGs 981-983 and 987-989 did not identify any cases needing reassignment. These are those extensive and non-extensive OR procedures unrelated to the principal diagnosis DRG sets.
There was a severity level change for homelessness, inadequate housing and housing instability Z59 codes. As of Oct. 1, these will no longer be considered CC conditions. Discussion in the final rule noted a similarity to the analysis of chronic illness diagnoses, further noting that a change of CC designation should be based on the expected resource use associated with the treatment of an underlying medical condition or illness rather than a patient’s social circumstances.
This is just a sampling of what changes are found in the FY27 final rule. Coders only have a couple of weeks to review and prepare.
Make sure you and your coding team are informed and ready to go on Oct.1
This article was originally published on RACmonitor.
August 14, 2026
The man accused of murdering UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson has pleaded guilty in the federal trial against him, per media reports.
This article was originally published on Fierce Healthcare.
August 14, 2026
Researchers analyzed data from insurers in Medicare Advantage, Medicaid managed care and ACA Marketplace market segments—representing approximately 71 million enrollees.
This article was originally published on Fierce Healthcare.
August 13, 2026
Aetna is seeing its value-based care efforts pay off in both preventive care metrics and cost savings, according to a new analysis from the company.
This article was originally published on Fierce Healthcare.
August 12, 2026
A federal appeals court has tossed key methodology used to resolve out-of-network claims under the No Surprises Act.
This article was originally published on Fierce Healthcare.