Case Study 06

Pressure Ulcer vs. Non-Pressure Ulcer Documentation Discrepancy

Case Summary

The face-to-face (F2F) documentation indicated that the patient has a chronic non-pressure ulcer of the right lower extremity. However, the clinician documented the wound as a Stage 2 pressure ulcer. This discrepancy affects wound classification and diagnosis coding and was identified during coding review. A clarification query was sent to the clinician, and the documentation was corrected accordingly.

Clinical Impact

Misclassification of a wound as a pressure ulcer instead of a non-pressure ulcer may result in an inaccurate assessment of the wound etiology, inappropriate treatment interventions, and incorrect patient education.

Diagnosis Coding Impact

Pressure ulcers are coded from category L89.- and require assignment of the anatomical location and stage. Chronic non-pressure ulcers are coded from category L97.- and require identification of the affected site and severity (e.g., limited to breakdown of skin, fat layer exposed, necrosis of muscle or bone). Incorrect wound classification may lead to assignment of the wrong ICD-10-CM code and inaccurate representation of the patient’s condition.

Reimbursement and PDGM Impact

Wound diagnosis coding directly affects PDGM clinical grouping, comorbidity adjustment, and overall case-mix weight. Incorrectly coding a pressure ulcer instead of a chronic non-pressure ulcer may result in inaccurate reimbursement and increased audit risk.

LUPA/Utilization Impact

Inaccurate wound classification may lead to inappropriate care planning and visit utilization, potentially affecting the number and type of skilled visits required to manage the wound effectively.

CMS Regulatory Impact

CMS requires that the comprehensive assessment accurately identify wound etiology and characteristics and that the plan of care reflect the correct diagnosis and treatment needs. Discrepancies between F2F documentation and clinician assessment may be cited as inaccurate documentation and inadequate care planning.

Coding Review Resolution

A clinician query was issued to reconcile the discrepancy between the F2F documentation and the OASIS assessment. The record was updated after clarification to ensure the diagnosis code, wound staging, and plan of care accurately reflected the patient’s condition.

Impact of Care

Mistake in medial record, wrong description of wound, wring diantosic coding, wrong coding.

bdslogo e1781334469860

Transforming Clinical Documentation, Compliance & Revenue Integrity.

© Copyright 2026 Bharari Digital Solutions (BDS). All Rights Reserved

Get a Free Audit

Identify documentation gaps, reduce risk, and protect your revenue.

Expert ReviewBy healthcare documentation specialists
Risk & Gap IdentificationPinpoint issues before they impact claims
Actionable InsightsRecommendations that drive results








    Your information is secure and will never be shared.
    No obligation. No commitment.

    Schedule a Consultation

    Let's discuss your challenges and explore how we can help your agency thrive.

    Personalized DiscussionUnderstand your specific needs
    Solutions Tailored for YouCustomized strategies for your agency
    Fast & FlexibleConsult at a time that works for you










      Your information is secure and will never be shared.
      We will confirm your appointment shortly.

      Download the Guide

      Fill in your details and we’ll email the guide to you.






        We respect your privacy. No spam, ever.
        Already have the guide? Contact us