GOHEALTHCARE MSK SPECIALTY PROCEDURE LIBRARY™

Shoulder Arthroscopy

Operational, Documentation, Medical Necessity, and Prior Authorization
Guide for MSK Specialty Practices, ASCs, and Hospital Outpatient
Departments

Document Profile

Attribute	Detail
Procedure	Shoulder Arthroscopy (diagnostic and surgical arthroscopic procedures of the glenohumeral joint and subacromial space)
Library	GoHealthcare MSK Specialty Procedure Library™
Standard	GoHealthcare Clinical Procedure Guide Standard v1.0
Specialty	Orthopedic Surgery · Sports Medicine · Shoulder
Primary CPT® families	29805; 29806–29825; 29826 (add-on); 29827; 29828
Setting	Hospital Outpatient (POS 22) · Ambulatory Surgery Center (POS 24)
Version / Date	1.1 · July 2026 (second-pass code audit applied)
Author	Pinky Maniri, MSc, CRCR, CSAPM, CSPPM, CSBI, CSPR, CSAF · Certified in Healthcare A.I. Governance · Founder & Chief Executive Officer, GoHealthcare Practice Solutions

Contents

1. Evidence at a Glance2. Overview3. Relevant Anatomy (High-Level Overview)4. Clinical Indications5. Patient Selection6. Contraindications7. Conservative Treatment Requirements8. Imaging Requirements9. Medical Necessity10. Medicare Coverage11. Commercial Payer Comparison12. Prior Authorization Workflow13. Documentation Requirements14. Common Prior Authorization Denials15. Appeal Strategies16. Coding & Billing Overview17. Implants, Devices, and System Considerations18. Clinical Documentation Checklist (Operative Note)19. Procedure Comparison20. GoHealthcare Clinical Insights21. GoHealthcare Leadership Perspective22. GoHealthcare Prior Authorization Insight23. GoHealthcare Case Study24. GoHealthcare Best Practices25. Common Mistakes26. Pearls and Pitfalls27. Frequently Asked Questions28. Key Takeaways29. Future Outlook30. References31. Reading Recommendations32. Related GoHealthcare Resources (Internal Links)33. Recommended Downloads34. Visual Recommendations35. Document History36. Educational Disclaimer

1

Evidence at a Glance

This one-page executive summary orients the authorization team before the full guide. It reflects current commercial utilization management (UM) criteria and Medicare posture as of mid-2026. Because shoulder arthroscopy is a code family rather than a single service, coverage is driven by the specific underlying pathology (rotator cuff, labrum, impingement, loose body, synovitis, adhesive capsulitis, instability) and by the specific CPT® reported.

Domain	Summary
Medicare NCD	No National Coverage Determination specific to shoulder arthroscopy. Coverage is under the general "reasonable and necessary" standard (Social Security Act 1862(a)(1)(A)).
Medicare LCD / MAC	No dedicated national LCD; Medicare Administrative Contractors apply general medical-review policy. Traditional Medicare (fee-for-service) does not require prior authorization for shoulder arthroscopy.
Commercial coverage	Broadly covered as medically necessary when conservative care fails and imaging/exam correlate. Managed by eviCore (CMM-315), Carelon (Joint Surgery), Cohere Health, and Evolent/NIA (CG-318).

Domain	Summary
Prior authorization	Required by most commercial plans and Medicare Advantage. Frequently delegated to eviCore, Carelon, Cohere, Evolent/NIA, or TurningPoint depending on plan.
Evidence base	Strong for structural repair (rotator cuff, instability/labral). Weaker / debated for isolated subacromial decompression and for arthroscopic debridement in glenohumeral osteoarthritis without a discrete mechanical target.
Image guidance	MRI or MR arthrography (or CT/CT arthrography where MRI contraindicated) is the standard pre-operative imaging supporting medical necessity.
Conservative therapy	Typically 6 or more weeks of documented non-operative care (activity modification, NSAIDs, physical therapy, and/or injection) for degenerative and impingement indications; exceptions apply to acute trauma, locked/displaced pathology, tumor, and infection.
Diagnostic block	Not applicable. (Diagnostic glenohumeral arthroscopy, 29805, is itself gated by strict criteria and is a "separate procedure.")
Key documentation	Duration and functional impact of symptoms; failed conservative care with dates; positive exam findings vs. contralateral side; correlating advanced imaging; clear operative intent tied to a covered indication.
Typical approval driver	A specific, imaging-confirmed, function-limiting mechanical lesion plus a documented, dated conservative-care trial. Most avoidable denials stem from missing dates or imaging that does not match the requested procedure.

2

Overview

Shoulder arthroscopy is a minimally invasive surgical approach in which a fiberoptic camera and instruments are introduced into the glenohumeral joint and/or subacromial space through small portals. It spans a wide spectrum of care, from purely diagnostic evaluation of internal derangement to definitive repair of the rotator cuff, labrum, and capsule. Because a single operative session may combine several distinct procedures, shoulder arthroscopy is one of the most coding- and authorization-intensive services in orthopedic and sports-medicine practice.

From an operations standpoint, the central question is rarely whether shoulder arthroscopy exists as a covered service; it is whether the specific pathology, conservative-care history, imaging, and operative plan documented for a given patient satisfy the payer's medical-necessity criteria for the exact CPT® combination requested. This guide bridges the clinical picture with the payer and revenue-cycle requirements that determine whether the case is approved on first submission and paid without rework.

What this guide is (and is not)

This is an operational, documentation, and payer-intelligence resource. It is not a surgical technique manual and does not provide portal placement, instrumentation technique, anesthesia, or physician procedural training. Clinical content is limited to what an authorization, documentation, coding, or revenue-cycle professional needs to understand purpose, patient selection, medical necessity, coverage, and coding for shoulder arthroscopy.

3

Relevant Anatomy (High-Level Overview)

Only the anatomy needed to interpret documentation and coverage criteria is summarized here.

• Glenohumeral joint: the ball-and-socket articulation of the humeral head and the glenoid. The shallow socket is deepened by the labrum, a fibrocartilaginous rim that also anchors the biceps and capsuloligamentous structures.

• Labrum: superior labral pathology at the biceps anchor is termed a SLAP (superior labrum anterior-posterior) lesion; anteroinferior labral detachment is a Bankart lesion associated with anterior instability.

• Rotator cuff: supraspinatus, infraspinatus, teres minor, and subscapularis tendons that stabilize and move the humeral head. Tears are classified by thickness (partial vs. full) and size.

• Subacromial space: the interval beneath the acromion containing the subacromial bursa; narrowing or spurring contributes to impingement.

• Long head of the biceps and acromioclavicular (AC) joint: common secondary pain generators addressed by tenodesis (biceps) or distal claviculectomy (AC joint).

• Joint capsule and synovium: targets in adhesive capsulitis (capsular release/lysis of adhesions) and inflammatory or crystalline synovitis (synovectomy).

4

Clinical Indications

Shoulder arthroscopy is performed for a defined set of mechanical and structural conditions, including:

• Symptomatic full-thickness or high-grade partial-thickness rotator cuff tears failing appropriate non-operative care.

• Recurrent or traumatic anterior/posterior instability with labral (Bankart) pathology; symptomatic SLAP lesions.

• Subacromial impingement / rotator cuff tendinopathy refractory to conservative management.

• Symptomatic loose or foreign bodies within the joint.

• Symptomatic labral tears, biceps anchor pathology, and long head of biceps tendinopathy warranting tenodesis.

• Symptomatic AC joint arthrosis warranting arthroscopic distal claviculectomy (Mumford).

• Refractory adhesive capsulitis (frozen shoulder) considered for arthroscopic capsular release / lysis of adhesions.

• Inflammatory, infectious (as urgent/emergent care), or crystalline synovitis requiring synovectomy or biopsy.

• Diagnostic evaluation of internal derangement when advanced imaging is inconclusive and criteria are met.

5

Patient Selection

Payers evaluate whether the right patient is being offered the right procedure at the right time. Documentation should establish each of the following, matched to the specific indication:

• A clear symptomatic complaint (pain, weakness, mechanical catching/locking, instability) with functional impact on activities of daily living, work, or sleep.

• Duration of symptoms and a dated trial of appropriate conservative care (except where an exception applies, such as acute trauma or an unstable/locked lesion).

• Objective examination findings that localize to the shoulder and correlate with the suspected lesion, compared with the contralateral side.

• Advanced imaging that confirms a lesion consistent with the planned procedure (for example, an MRI-confirmed full-thickness cuff tear for a repair request).

• Reasonable general health and surgical candidacy, with expectations aligned to the natural history of the specific diagnosis.

• For instability procedures, factors such as age at first dislocation, number of recurrences, and activity demands, which several payers weigh explicitly.

6

Contraindications

• Active local or systemic infection (unless the arthroscopy is itself for source control such as irrigation and debridement of septic arthritis).

• Medical instability precluding safe anesthesia/surgery.

• Advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis or cuff-tear arthropathy where arthroscopy will not address the primary structural problem (arthroplasty pathways may be more appropriate).

• Absent or non-correlating imaging and exam findings (a relative contraindication that also predicts denial).

• Symptoms attributable to another generator (for example, cervical radiculopathy) that has not been evaluated or excluded.

• Unrealistic patient expectations or inability to participate in the required post-operative rehabilitation for repair procedures.

7

Conservative Treatment Requirements

For most degenerative, impingement, and non-acute indications, payers require documented, dated non-operative care before authorizing arthroscopy. Requirements vary by indication and payer, but the operative record and authorization packet should reflect the elements below.

Element	What payers look for
Duration	Commonly a minimum of 6 weeks (and frequently up to 3 months) of active non-operative care for degenerative/impingement indications; documented with start and end dates.
Physical therapy	A supervised or structured home program addressing the specific diagnosis, with dates, frequency, and functional response.
Pharmacologic care	NSAIDs or analgesics as tolerated, plus activity modification and, where applicable, "joint conservation techniques" now referenced in several UM policies.
Injections	Subacromial or intra-articular corticosteroid injection where clinically appropriate, with documented response and dates.
Documented failure	A clear statement that conservative care was completed and failed to achieve durable functional improvement.
Recognized exceptions	Acute full-thickness traumatic cuff tears, locked/irreducible instability, displaced fractures, tumor, infection, and certain young first-time dislocators may bypass the standard trial per policy.
PA Insight: the 2026 conservative-care drift Utilization-management vendors continue to refine non-operative requirements. For 2026, TurningPoint added "joint conservation techniques" to the applicable non-operative treatment language for shoulder procedures and refined instability criteria (for example, treatment of a first-time dislocation in a patient under 30 is handled differently from recurrent instability). Build your intake template to capture activity modification and joint-conservation counseling as discrete, dated items so these newer criteria are satisfied on the face of the record.

8

Imaging Requirements

• Plain radiographs of the shoulder are the baseline study and help exclude arthrosis, fracture, calcific deposits, and os acromiale.

• MRI is the standard advanced study for cuff, labral, and soft-tissue pathology. MR arthrography improves sensitivity for labral (SLAP/Bankart) lesions.

• CT or CT arthrography is used where MRI is contraindicated (for example, certain implanted devices) or when bony detail (glenoid bone loss in instability) is needed.

• Imaging findings must correlate with the planned procedure. A frequent denial driver is a request for a specific repair when the imaging report does not describe a lesion supporting that repair.

• Diagnostic arthroscopy (29805) is generally reserved for cases where advanced imaging is inconclusive for internal derangement and strict criteria are otherwise met.

9

Medical Necessity

Medical necessity for shoulder arthroscopy is established by aligning four documentation pillars with the specific procedure requested. The absence of any one pillar is the most common reason otherwise appropriate cases are delayed or denied.

Pillar	Documentation that demonstrates it
Symptoms & function	Character, duration, and functional impact of pain/weakness/instability; effect on ADLs, work, and sleep.
Conservative care	Dated trial of PT, medications, activity modification, and/or injections, with documented outcome (except recognized exceptions).

Pillar	Documentation that demonstrates it
Objective findings	Exam findings that localize and correlate (for example, positive impingement or instability testing) versus the contralateral side.
Imaging correlation	Advanced imaging describing a lesion consistent with the planned procedure, referenced explicitly in the request.

A concise medical-necessity statement that ties these pillars together, names the specific lesion and planned procedure, and confirms failed conservative care is the single most valuable element in the authorization packet.

10

Medicare Coverage

Medicare does not maintain a National Coverage Determination specific to shoulder arthroscopy, and there is no dedicated national Local Coverage Determination for the procedure family. Coverage is therefore governed by the general "reasonable and necessary" standard and by Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC) medical-review policy applied to the documented indication.

• Prior authorization: Traditional (fee-for-service) Medicare does not require prior authorization for shoulder arthroscopy. Shoulder arthroscopy is not part of the Hospital Outpatient Department prior-authorization program.

• Medicare Advantage: MA plans routinely apply commercial-style UM and frequently delegate shoulder-surgery review to eviCore, Carelon, Cohere, Evolent/NIA, or TurningPoint; prior authorization is commonly required.

• Documentation expectations: the same medical-necessity pillars apply. MACs expect correlating imaging, conservative-care history where applicable, and an operative note that supports the exact codes billed.

• Site of service: most shoulder arthroscopy is performed in the hospital outpatient department or ASC; medical necessity for inpatient admission (when applicable) must be separately supported.

Note on Medicare posture

Because no NCD or dedicated LCD constrains shoulder arthroscopy, denials under traditional Medicare are typically post-payment medical-review findings rather than pre-service denials. The protective control is a complete operative note whose documented structures and work match the billed CPT® combination, especially for debridement (29822/29823) and add-on decompression (29826).

11

Commercial Payer Comparison

The table synthesizes how the major UM vendors and national plans approach shoulder arthroscopy. Requirements are summarized, not reproduced; always verify the member's specific plan and the current guideline version before submission.

Payer / vendor	How shoulder arthroscopy is managed (summary)
eviCore by Evernorth	Comprehensive MSK guideline CMM-315 (Shoulder Surgery — Arthroscopic and Open Procedures); shoulder arthroplasty under CMM-318. Diagnostic arthroscopy (29805) is a "separate procedure" allowed only when strict criteria are met (function-limiting pain of roughly 6 months, abnormal exam vs. contralateral side, and inconclusive advanced imaging). Manages many Cigna and Medicare Advantage lines.
Carelon Medical Benefits Mgmt	"Joint Surgery" guideline. Notably bundles: all arthroscopic shoulder procedures are treated as inclusive of diagnostic arthroscopy and manipulation under anesthesia; open cuff repair is inclusive of diagnostic arthroscopy. In-office diagnostic arthroscopy devices are considered not medically necessary. Common on Anthem/Elevance lines.
Cohere Health	MSK surgical authorization platform used by several plans (including Humana lines). Emphasizes conservative-care documentation and imaging correlation; intelligent intake often auto-approves well-documented requests.
Evolent / National Imaging Associates (NIA)	Shoulder Arthroscopy clinical guideline NIA CG 318 with a UM code matrix defining allowable billed _ _ groupings (rotator cuff repair, labral repair, adhesive capsulitis, and "shoulder surgery other").

Payer / vendor	How shoulder arthroscopy is managed (summary)
TurningPoint Healthcare Solutions	Delegated surgical PA for orthopedic/spine procedures on many plans. 2026 policy updates added "joint conservation techniques" to non-operative requirements and refined instability criteria (for example, first-time dislocation under age 30).
UnitedHealthcare	Prior authorization required for many outpatient shoulder surgeries; UHC applies its own medical policies and increasingly leverages designated UM programs. Confirm the current notification/PA list by plan.
Aetna	Clinical Policy Bulletins address rotator cuff repair, labral repair, and subacromial decompression; PA typically required for scheduled arthroscopic procedures.
Cigna	Uses eviCore CMM-315/CMM-318 for MSK surgical review on managed lines; conservative-care and imaging correlation are central.
Humana	Applies MSK UM (often via Cohere on certain lines) with conservative-care and imaging documentation requirements; PA generally required for elective arthroscopy.
Blue Cross Blue Shield plans	Vary by state licensee; many delegate to Carelon, eviCore, or TurningPoint. Verify the specific BCBS plan's vendor and current policy.
Clinical Insight: know your vendor's bundling rules before you submit The single most important payer-specific nuance in shoulder arthroscopy is bundling. Carelon explicitly treats arthroscopic procedures as inclusive of diagnostic arthroscopy and manipulation under anesthesia, and eviCore restricts 29805 to narrowly defined scenarios. If your request or your claim lists a diagnostic arthroscopy alongside a surgical arthroscopy on the same shoulder, expect it to be denied or bundled. Confirm each vendor's inclusive-procedure language during case build, not after the denial.

Payer guideline currency

Currency note: eviCore's February 2026 policy update records that CMM-315 was revised with clinical changes that LIMIT coverage, effective 03/07/2026 — alongside CMM-311 (Knee Replacement) and CMM-313 (Hip Replacement). By contrast CMM-312, CMM-314, and CMM-318 were updated with no clinically impactful changes in that cycle. The Cigna commercial editions carry an effective date of 08/04/2026. Confirm the version in force at the time of service.

12

Prior Authorization Workflow

A dependable, first-pass workflow for elective shoulder arthroscopy runs as follows:

• 1. Eligibility & vendor identification. Verify benefits and determine which entity holds surgical PA for the plan (eviCore, Carelon, Cohere, Evolent/NIA, TurningPoint, or the plan itself).

• 2. Clinical assembly. Gather the office notes documenting symptoms/function, the dated conservative-care history, exam findings, and the advanced imaging report.

• 3. Procedure mapping. Translate the surgeon's operative plan into the exact CPT® codes anticipated and confirm each is on the plan's PA list.

• 4. Medical-necessity statement. Draft a concise statement naming the lesion, the planned procedure, correlating imaging, and completed conservative care.

• 5. Submission. Submit via the vendor portal (for example, the eviCore portal, Carelon provider portal, Cohere, or the TurningPoint web portal) or the plan's channel; the portal is generally the fastest path.

• 6. Track & respond. Monitor for additional-information requests; respond promptly to avoid administrative denials during case build.

• 7. Peer-to-peer if needed. If pended for medical necessity, request a peer-to-peer with the specifics ready; most avoidable P2Ps stem from missing documentation, not clinical disagreement.

• 8. Confirm & schedule. Record the authorization number, approved codes, and validity window; schedule within the window and align the ASC/hospital and anesthesia authorization.

13

Documentation Requirements

Use this checklist to assemble a first-pass authorization packet and a defensible operative record:

• Chief complaint with pain score and functional impact (ADLs, work, sleep)

• Symptom duration with onset date and mechanism (traumatic vs. degenerative)

• Dated conservative treatment history (PT, medications, activity modification, injections) and documented response

• Focused shoulder examination with findings compared to the contralateral side

• Provocative/instability testing results relevant to the suspected lesion

• Plain radiograph findings

• Advanced imaging report (MRI / MR arthrogram / CT arthrogram) describing a lesion consistent with the planned procedure

• Exclusion or evaluation of alternative pain generators (for example, cervical spine) where indicated

• Specific planned procedure and anticipated CPT® code combination

• Concise medical-necessity statement tying the above together

• Laterality clearly documented (right / left)

• Prior surgical history on the same shoulder (supports revision coding where applicable)

14

Common Prior Authorization Denials

Denial reason	Root cause / prevention
Insufficient conservative care	No dates, no duration, or PT/injections not documented. Prevention: capture dated non-operative care and outcome before scheduling.
Imaging does not support procedure	Requested repair not described on MRI, or MRI absent. Prevention: quote the imaging finding that matches the planned code.
Diagnostic arthroscopy not supported	29805 requested with a surgical arthroscopy or without inconclusive imaging. Prevention: understand vendor bundling; reserve 29805 for true diagnostic scenarios.
Missing functional impairment	Pain documented without functional impact. Prevention: state effect on ADLs, work, and sleep.
Instability criteria not met	Age at first dislocation or recurrence count not documented for stabilization. Prevention: capture instability history explicitly.
Administrative / case-build denial	Requested records not returned in the vendor's window. Prevention: monitor the portal and respond within the stated timeframe.
Wrong or unspecified diagnosis code	Unspecified laterality or non-specific ICD-10. Prevention: code to highest specificity with laterality.

15

Appeal Strategies

Most shoulder arthroscopy denials are documentation gaps rather than true coverage exclusions, which means they are highly appealable when addressed precisely.

• Identify the exact criterion cited in the denial and respond to that criterion directly, point by point.

• Supply the missing dated conservative-care records or the specific imaging sentence that describes the lesion.

• Include a focused letter of medical necessity from the surgeon that names the lesion, the failed non-operative course, and the planned procedure.

• Where a diagnostic-arthroscopy or bundling denial occurred, re-map the request to the correct surgical code(s) rather than re-submitting 29805.

• Request a peer-to-peer only when the record is complete; enter it with the imaging, exam, and conservative-care timeline in hand.

• Track the plan's internal and external appeal deadlines; preserve external/independent review rights for medical-necessity disputes.

PA Insight: the peer-to-peer you can avoid

A large share of peer-to-peer reviews in shoulder arthroscopy are triggered by a single missing element, usually the dated conservative-care trial or the imaging sentence that matches the planned repair. A pre-submission quality check that confirms both is present typically eliminates the P2P entirely and converts a pended case into a first-pass approval.

16

Coding & Billing Overview

This is an operational overview for authorization and revenue-cycle teams; it is not a fee schedule or an exhaustive edit table. Detailed reimbursement methodology belongs in the GoHealthcare Revenue Cycle Knowledge Center. All codes below were verified against current CPT® and ICD-10-CM (FY2026) sources; always confirm against the current code set and payer policy at time of service.

Applicable CPT® Codes (Arthroscopic Shoulder)

CPT®	Descriptor (summary)	Notes
29805	Arthroscopy, shoulder, diagnostic, with or without synovial biopsy	"Separate procedure"; generally bundled into a surgical arthroscopy of the same shoulder.
29806	Surgical; capsulorrhaphy	Capsular repair for instability.
29807	Surgical; repair of SLAP lesion	Superior labrum anterior-posterior repair.
29819	Surgical; removal of loose/foreign body
29820	Surgical; synovectomy, partial
29821	Surgical; synovectomy, complete
29822	Surgical; debridement, limited, 1 or 2 discrete structures	Discrete structures are anatomical (2021 revision); often bundled by NCCI.
29823	Surgical; debridement, extensive, 3 or more discrete structures	Requires 3 or more named structures documented; separately reportable with 29824/29827/29828 only when in a different area of the same shoulder.
29824	Surgical; distal claviculectomy (Mumford)	AC joint resection.
29825	Surgical; lysis of adhesions, with or without manipulation	Adhesive capsulitis / capsular release.
+29826	Surgical; decompression of subacromial space, partial acromioplasty, coracoacromial ligament release	ADD-ON code; report only with 29806–29825, 29827, or 29828 — never alone.
29827	Surgical; rotator cuff repair	Full-thickness cuff repair.
29828	Surgical; biceps tenodesis	Separately reportable with cuff repair when both are distinct procedures.

Selected Open Shoulder Codes (context)

Open counterparts appear on the same UM code lists and may be substituted intra-operatively; common examples include 23410/23412/23420 (rotator cuff repair, acute/chronic/complete) and 23430 (biceps tenodesis, open). Confirm the operative approach before final coding.

HCPCS

No routine Level II HCPCS procedure code is required for standard shoulder arthroscopy. Suture anchors and other implants are generally not separately reported by the physician; facility supply reporting is governed by facility contracts and revenue codes rather than a physician HCPCS code.

Common ICD-10-CM Diagnosis Codes (FY2026, verified)

ICD-10-CM	Description	Coding note
M75.101 / M75.102	Unspecified rotator cuff tear/rupture, right / left, not specified as traumatic	Laterality required; 6th digit specifies shoulder.
M75.121 / M75.122	Complete rotator cuff tear/rupture, right / left, not specified as traumatic	Use for full-thickness degenerative tears.
M75.111 / M75.112	Incomplete rotator cuff tear/rupture, right / left	Partial-thickness tears.
M75.41 / M75.42	Impingement syndrome of shoulder, right / left
M75.01 / M75.02	Adhesive capsulitis of shoulder, right / left	Frozen shoulder.
M75.21 / M75.22	Bicipital tendinitis, right / left	NOT an epicondylitis (M77.1-) code — a common miscode.
M75.31 / M75.32	Calcific tendinitis of shoulder, right / left
M75.51 / M75.52	Bursitis of shoulder, right / left
M75.81 / M75.82	Other shoulder lesions, right / left	Use for degenerative (non-traumatic) labral pathology. NOTE: ICD-10-CM has NO M75.6- code — "tear of labrum of degenerative shoulder joint" exists in the German ICD-10-GM, not the U.S. CM code set. Do not report M75.61/M75.62.
S43.431A / S43.432A	Superior glenoid labrum lesion (SLAP), right / left, initial encounter	Traumatic labral lesion; 7th character A/D/S.
M24.411 / M24.412	Recurrent dislocation, right / left shoulder	Supports instability/capsulorrhaphy (29806) requests.
M24.011 / M24.012	Loose body in shoulder joint, right / left	Supports 29819.
M19.011 / M19.012	Primary osteoarthritis, shoulder, right / left	Often an arthroplasty driver rather than arthroscopy.
M25.511 / M25.512	Pain in shoulder, right / left	Non-specific; support with a definitive structural code where possible.

Applicable Modifiers

Modifier	Use
RT / LT	Laterality; append per payer requirement.
50	Bilateral procedure (rarely applicable in a single session for the shoulder).
59 / X{EPSU}	Distinct procedural service; used cautiously and only when NCCI permits — not to bypass valid bundles (for example, do not use 59 to unbundle 29805 from a surgical arthroscopy of the same shoulder).
22	Increased procedural services; requires operative-note support and is scrutinized.
RC (facility) / KX	Payer- or context-specific; verify applicability.
AS / 80 / 81 / 82	Assistant-at-surgery, when documented and supported.

Place of Service (POS) and ASC Considerations

• POS 24 (Ambulatory Surgical Center) and POS 22 (On-Campus Hospital Outpatient) are the usual settings; POS 21 only when an inpatient stay is separately justified.

• ASC facility billing follows the ASC payment system and the facility's payer contracts; the physician professional claim and the ASC facility claim are separate and must both reflect the authorized codes.

• Confirm the authorization covers the specific site of service; a mismatch between the authorized and rendered POS is a preventable denial.

Common billing pitfalls

• Reporting 29805 with a surgical arthroscopy of the same shoulder (bundled by NCCI and by payer policy).

• Reporting +29826 without a valid primary arthroscopic procedure (it is an add-on code and cannot stand alone).

• Using 29823 (extensive debridement) when fewer than three discrete structures are documented, or double-counting a structure that was repaired rather than debrided.

• Unspecified laterality or non-specific diagnosis codes that fail payer specificity edits.

Currency warning

NCCI procedure-to-procedure edits and their modifier indicators are republished quarterly, and a modifier indicator of 0 means no documentation will unlock separate payment. Verify the active CMS edit files rather than relying on cached tables, vendor coding guides, or society publications, all of which lag. Bundling positions in this procedure family have changed before and can change again.

17

Implants, Devices, and System Considerations

Pure diagnostic and debridement arthroscopy typically involves no implant. Repair procedures (rotator cuff, labral/instability, biceps tenodesis) commonly use suture anchors and related fixation from manufacturers such as Arthrex, DePuy Synthes (Mitek), Stryker, Smith+Nephew, Zimmer Biomet, and CONMED. Operationally relevant points:

• Physician professional coding does not change based on anchor brand; the CPT® reflects the procedure, not the implant.

• Facilities account for implant cost through contracts and facility reporting, not a separate physician HCPCS code.

• Some biologic or augmentation adjuncts (for example, dermal allograft augmentation or synthetic patches) have distinct coverage postures and may face separate medical-necessity review; verify before use.

• Document the specific fixation used in the operative note to support the reported repair and to defend against post-payment review.

• MRI conditionality is generally not a limiting factor for standard suture-anchor constructs, but device-specific labeling governs future imaging where relevant.

18

Clinical Documentation Checklist (Operative Note)

For clean coding and post-payment defensibility, the operative note should explicitly capture:

• Laterality and the specific joint compartment(s) entered (glenohumeral and/or subacromial)

• Each discrete structure evaluated and each structure treated (named individually)

• For debridement: the specific discrete structures debrided (to distinguish 29822 from 29823)

• For repair: the structure repaired, fixation used, and that debridement (if any) was a different area of the same shoulder

• Whether subacromial decompression/acromioplasty (add-on 29826) was performed and its primary procedure

• Whether a diagnostic arthroscopy was truly separate or part of the surgical procedure

• Findings that support the reported diagnosis code(s) and laterality

• Any conversion from arthroscopic to open approach

19

Procedure Comparison

Shoulder arthroscopy sits within a continuum from diagnostic evaluation to reconstruction and replacement. The comparison orients authorization teams to where a given request falls.

Procedure	Typical target	Representative codes	Authorization emphasis
Diagnostic arthroscopy	Inconclusive internal derangement	29805	Strict criteria; inconclusive imaging; often bundled
Debridement / synovectomy	Fraying, synovitis, loose body	29819–29823	Discrete-structure documentation; NCCI bundling
Subacromial decompression	Impingement	+29826 (add-on)	Failed conservative care; must pair with primary code
Rotator cuff repair	Full-thickness cuff tear	29827 (open 23410–23412)	Imaging-confirmed tear; conservative-care history
Labral / instability repair	SLAP, Bankart, instability	29806, 29807	Instability history; MR arthrogram; age/recurrence factors
Biceps tenodesis	LHB pathology	29828 (open 23430)	Symptom localization; often adjunct to cuff repair
Shoulder arthroplasty	Advanced arthritis, cuff arthropathy	23470, 23472, 23473, 23474 (separate guides)	Different guideline family (eviCore CMM-318; Evolent/NIA CG-317)

20

GoHealthcare Clinical Insights

Operational recommendations from MSK authorization practice

• Build a shoulder-specific intake template that forces dated conservative-care entry and an imaging-finding field; templates that leave these free-text tend to produce gaps.

• Have the coder and the authorization specialist agree on the anticipated code combination before submission, so the request and the eventual claim tell the same story.

• Capture laterality at intake and carry it through the request, the operative note, and the claim to avoid specificity edits.

• For impingement and degenerative indications, document the conservative-care trial as discrete, dated items (PT dates, injection date and response, medications).

• For instability, record age at first dislocation and recurrence count up front; several vendors now weigh these explicitly.

• Read the denial letter for the exact criterion cited; responding to the wrong criterion is a leading cause of failed first appeals.

21

GoHealthcare Leadership Perspective

Executive view: shoulder arthroscopy as an authorization discipline

Shoulder arthroscopy is where documentation discipline and revenue integrity intersect most visibly in an orthopedic or sports-medicine service line. Because a single case can combine diagnostic, debridement, decompression, and repair components, the margin between a clean first-pass approval and a rework-laden denial is almost entirely a function of upstream documentation quality and code-to-record alignment.

The organizations that perform best treat prior authorization as a pre-service quality gate rather than a clerical step: they verify the vendor and its bundling rules, confirm the four medical-necessity pillars, and reconcile the anticipated codes with the operative plan before the patient is scheduled. AI-enabled intake and criteria-matching can accelerate this, but governance matters — automated criteria checks should be validated against the current guideline version and reviewed by qualified staff before a determination is relied upon. Done well, this converts avoidable peer-to-peer reviews and post-payment recoupments into predictable, compliant throughput.

22

GoHealthcare Prior Authorization Insight

What we see that payer policies do not spell out

• Bundling is the hidden denial engine. Carelon treats arthroscopic shoulder procedures as inclusive of diagnostic arthroscopy and MUA; eviCore restricts 29805. Map the request to surgical codes from the start.

• Imaging correlation must be explicit. Do not assume the reviewer will infer the lesion — quote the imaging sentence that names the structure to be repaired.

• Dates beat narrative. "Failed conservative care" without dates is the most common soft denial; discrete, dated entries clear it.

• 2026 criteria are drifting toward joint-conservation language. Capture activity modification and joint-conservation counseling as discrete items to satisfy newer TurningPoint criteria.

• Reconcile the operative note to the claim. Post-payment review targets 29822/29823 debridement and 29826 add-on; the note must name the discrete structures and the primary procedure.

• One internal QA pass prevents most P2Ps. A checklist that confirms conservative-care dates and imaging correlation before submission is the highest-yield control in the workflow.

23

GoHealthcare Case Study

Educational scenario — details are illustrative and do not identify any actual patient or organization.

Clinical Scenario

A 54-year-old right-hand-dominant patient presents with six months of progressive right shoulder pain, night pain, and weakness with overhead activity. Examination shows positive impingement signs and supraspinatus weakness compared with the left. MRI describes a full-thickness supraspinatus tear with retraction. The surgeon plans an arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with subacromial decompression.

Documentation Challenges

The initial authorization packet listed "failed conservative therapy" without dates and did not reference the specific MRI finding. The anticipated codes on the request (29827 with 29826) were correct, but a diagnostic arthroscopy (29805) had also been added by habit.

Prior Authorization Barriers

The plan delegated review to a UM vendor whose policy bundles diagnostic arthroscopy into surgical arthroscopy and requires documented conservative care with imaging correlation. The request pended for additional information and was at risk of a medical-necessity denial and peer-to-peer.

Payer Considerations

The vendor's guideline required a dated non-operative trial (or a recognized exception) and an imaging-confirmed lesion matching the planned repair; it also would not authorize a separately billed diagnostic arthroscopy of the same shoulder.

Operational Workflow & Resolution Strategy

• Removed 29805 from the request and re-mapped to 29827 with add-on 29826.

• Added dated conservative-care records (physical therapy dates, a subacromial injection with documented response, and NSAID trial).

• Quoted the specific MRI sentence describing the full-thickness supraspinatus tear with retraction.

• Attached a two-paragraph medical-necessity statement tying symptoms, function, failed conservative care, and imaging to the planned repair.

Outcome

The re-submission was approved on the next review cycle without a peer-to-peer. The operative note later documented the repaired structure and the subacromial decompression as distinct work, so the claim matched the authorization and paid without rework.

Lessons Learned

• Habitual inclusion of 29805 is a frequent, avoidable trigger for bundling denials.

• Dated conservative-care entries and a quoted imaging finding convert a pended case into a first-pass approval.

• Aligning the anticipated codes, the request, and the eventual operative note is the core discipline that protects both approval and payment.

24

GoHealthcare Best Practices

• Standardize a shoulder-arthroscopy intake template with forced fields for conservative-care dates, imaging findings, laterality, and instability history.

• Confirm the plan's UM vendor and its inclusive-procedure (bundling) rules at eligibility, not after denial.

• Reserve 29805 for genuinely diagnostic, imaging-inconclusive scenarios that meet criteria.

• Reconcile anticipated codes with the operative plan before scheduling and re-reconcile against the final operative note before billing.

• Run a one-pass internal QA check (conservative-care dates present; imaging correlation quoted; laterality specific) before every submission.

• Maintain a payer-policy watch so guideline version changes (for example, eviCore CMM-315 effective dates and TurningPoint 2026 updates) are caught each cycle.

25

Common Mistakes

• Billing diagnostic arthroscopy (29805) alongside a surgical arthroscopy of the same shoulder.

• Reporting add-on 29826 without a valid primary arthroscopic procedure.

• Selecting 29823 (extensive debridement) without documenting three or more discrete structures, or counting a repaired structure as a debrided structure.

• Miscoding bicipital tendinitis with an epicondylitis code (M77.1-) instead of M75.21/M75.22.

• Reporting a non-existent "M75.6-" degenerative labral tear code (an ICD-10-GM code circulated by non-authoritative U.S. coding sources); use M75.81/M75.82 or the traumatic S43.43- family.

• Submitting unspecified-laterality or non-specific diagnosis codes that fail specificity edits.

• Stating "failed conservative care" without dates or documented response.

• Requesting a repair that the imaging report does not describe.

• Overlooking the plan's delegated UM vendor and submitting to the wrong entity.

26

Pearls and Pitfalls

Pearls	Pitfalls
Map the operative plan to codes before submitting.	Assuming every documented debridement is separately billable.
Quote the exact imaging finding that matches the repair.	Relying on a non-specific pain code (M25.51-) alone.
Capture conservative-care dates as discrete items.	Narrative-only "failed conservative therapy" statements.
Know each vendor's bundling and 29805 rules.	Submitting 29805 with a same-shoulder surgical arthroscopy.
Document instability age/recurrence up front.	Ignoring 2026 instability and joint-conservation criteria.
Reconcile the note to the claim before billing.	Post-payment exposure on 29822/29823 and 29826.

27

Frequently Asked Questions

Q1. Does shoulder arthroscopy always require prior authorization? For most commercial plans and Medicare Advantage, yes, and review is frequently delegated to a UM vendor. Traditional fee-for-service Medicare does not require prior authorization for shoulder arthroscopy, though post-payment medical review still applies.

Q2. Which UM vendors manage shoulder arthroscopy? Depending on the plan, eviCore (CMM-315), Carelon (Joint Surgery), Cohere Health, Evolent/NIA (CG-318), and TurningPoint are the most common. Always confirm the specific plan's vendor at eligibility.

Q3. Is there a Medicare NCD or LCD for shoulder arthroscopy? No. There is no National Coverage Determination and no dedicated national LCD specific to shoulder arthroscopy. Coverage is under the general reasonable-and-necessary standard with MAC medical review.

Q4. Can I bill diagnostic arthroscopy (29805) with a rotator cuff repair (29827) on the same shoulder? Generally no. 29805 is a "separate procedure" that is bundled into a surgical arthroscopy of the same shoulder by NCCI and by payer policy. Report the surgical code.

Q5. What distinguishes 29822 from 29823? 29822 is limited debridement of one or two discrete anatomical structures; 29823 is extensive debridement of three or more. The structures are anatomical (per the 2021 CPT revision), and a structure that was repaired should not also be counted as debrided.

Q6. Is 29826 a stand-alone code? No. 29826 (subacromial decompression/partial acromioplasty/coracoacromial ligament release) is an add-on code reported only in conjunction with a primary arthroscopic procedure such as 29806–29825, 29827, or 29828.

Q7. How much conservative care must be documented before approval? It varies by indication and payer, but a documented, dated trial (commonly at least 6 weeks, and often up to 3 months) of physical therapy, medications, activity modification, and/or injection is typical for degenerative and impingement indications.

Q8. Are there exceptions to the conservative-care requirement? Yes. Acute full-thickness traumatic tears, locked or irreducible instability, displaced fractures, tumor, infection, and certain young first-time dislocators may bypass the standard trial per policy.

Q9. What imaging supports medical necessity? MRI or MR arthrography is standard; CT or CT arthrography is used where MRI is contraindicated or bony detail is needed. The imaging must describe a lesion consistent with the planned procedure.

Q10. When is diagnostic arthroscopy (29805) appropriate? When advanced imaging is inconclusive for internal derangement and the payer's specific criteria (for example, function-limiting pain and abnormal exam findings) are met. Several vendors restrict it tightly.

Q11. How do I code a degenerative labral tear versus a SLAP lesion? A traumatic superior labral (SLAP) lesion uses S43.43- with a 7th character (A/D/S). For degenerative, non-traumatic labral pathology use M75.81/M75.82 (Other shoulder lesions). Be aware that widely circulated coding content cites an "M75.6- tear of labrum of degenerative shoulder joint" code; that code exists in the German ICD-10-GM, NOT in U.S. ICD-10-CM, and reporting it will reject. Document trauma versus degeneration and laterality.

Q12. What is the correct code for biceps tendinitis? M75.21 (right) or M75.22 (left) for bicipital tendinitis. Do not use an epicondylitis code (M77.1-), which is a common miscode.

Q13. Can rotator cuff repair and biceps tenodesis be billed together? Yes, when both are distinct procedures on different structures and are documented as such (29827 and 29828). Confirm NCCI and payer bundling.

Q14. What place of service applies? Usually POS 24 (ASC) or POS 22 (on-campus hospital outpatient); POS 21 only when an inpatient stay is separately justified. Confirm the authorization matches the site of service.

Q15. Why was my extensive debridement (29823) denied or downcoded? Most often because fewer than three discrete structures were documented, or a repaired structure was double-counted as debrided. The operative note must name each discrete structure.

Q16. Are suture anchors separately billable by the physician? No. Implants are not separately reported on the physician professional claim; facility supply reporting follows facility contracts and reporting rules.

Q17. What triggers a peer-to-peer, and how do I avoid it? Usually a missing conservative-care date or an imaging finding that does not match the request. A pre-submission QA check confirming both typically prevents the peer-to-peer.

Q18. How should instability cases be documented? Capture age at first dislocation, number of recurrences, activity demands, and any glenoid bone loss on imaging; several vendors weigh these explicitly for stabilization procedures.

Q19. What are the most common avoidable denials? Insufficient/undated conservative care, imaging that does not support the procedure, improper use of 29805, and non-specific or unspecified-laterality diagnosis codes.

Q20. How often do the guidelines change? Frequently. eviCore CMM-315 and CMM-318 carry version and effective dates; TurningPoint issued 2026 MSK policy updates. Verify the current version each authorization cycle.

Q21. Does bilateral shoulder arthroscopy in one session happen? Rarely; when it does, apply the appropriate bilateral or laterality modifiers per payer policy and confirm authorization for both sides.

Q22. Where does detailed reimbursement analysis live? Fee schedules, payment rates, NCCI/MUE tables, and revenue-cycle modeling belong in the GoHealthcare Revenue Cycle Knowledge Center, not in this operational guide.

28

Key Takeaways

• Shoulder arthroscopy is a code family; coverage and coding follow the specific pathology and the exact procedure performed.

• There is no Medicare NCD or dedicated LCD; traditional Medicare does not require PA, but most commercial and MA plans do.

• eviCore (CMM-315), Carelon (Joint Surgery), Cohere, Evolent/NIA (CG-318), and TurningPoint are the dominant UM pathways — each with its own bundling rules.

• Medical necessity rests on four pillars: symptoms/function, dated conservative care, correlating exam, and correlating imaging.

• The highest-yield operational control is a one-pass QA check confirming conservative-care dates and imaging correlation before submission.

• Reconcile anticipated codes with the operative plan and the final operative note to protect both approval and payment.

29

Future Outlook

• UM criteria are trending toward explicit joint-conservation and activity-modification language, raising the bar for non-operative documentation.

• AI-enabled intake and criteria-matching (including auto-approval of well-documented requests) are expanding; governance and validation against current guideline versions will be essential.

• Instability criteria continue to individualize around age, recurrence, and bone loss, rewarding structured up-front documentation.

• Biologic augmentation and patch/graft adjuncts will face distinct, evolving coverage postures separate from the base arthroscopy codes.

• Site-of-service steerage toward ASCs will continue, making POS accuracy and dual (professional/facility) authorization increasingly important.

30

References

• American Medical Association. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT®) and CPT® Assistant (arthroscopic shoulder debridement code revisions, 29822/29823). Website: https://www.ama-assn.org

• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Medicare Coverage Database (NCDs, LCDs, and Articles). Website: https://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database

• Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Medicare Physician Fee Schedule and Medicare Learning Network. Website: https://www.cms.gov

• eviCore by Evernorth. Comprehensive Musculoskeletal Management Guideline CMM-315 (Shoulder Surgery — Arthroscopic and Open Procedures) and CMM-318 (Shoulder Arthroplasty). Website: https://www.evicore.com

• Carelon Medical Benefits Management. Joint Surgery Clinical Guideline. Website: https://guidelines.carelonmedicalbenefitsmanagement.com

• Cohere Health. Musculoskeletal Surgical Authorization Program. Website: https://www.coherehealth.com

• Evolent / National Imaging Associates. Shoulder Arthroscopy Clinical Guideline (NIA_CG_318). Website: https://www.evolent.com

• TurningPoint Healthcare Solutions. Musculoskeletal Medical Policies and 2026 Updates. Website: https://www.myturningpoint-healthcare.com

• American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS). Clinical Practice Guidelines and coding guidance. Website: https://www.aaos.org

• American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine (AOSSM). Website: https://www.sportsmed.org

• Rhon DI, Tucker CJ. Nonoperative Care Including Rehabilitation Should Be Considered and Clearly Defined Prior to Elective Orthopaedic Surgery. Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation. 2022;4(1):e231–e236. Website: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asmr.2021.09.038

• Belk JW, et al. Shoulder Stabilization Versus Immobilization for First-Time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2023;51(6):1634–1643. Website: https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465211065403

• U.S. National Center for Health Statistics / CMS. ICD-10-CM (FY2026) Official Code Set. Website: https://www.cms.gov/medicare/coding-billing/icd-10-codes

• UnitedHealthcare, Aetna, Cigna, Humana, and Blue Cross Blue Shield plan medical policies (shoulder arthroscopy / rotator cuff / labral repair / subacromial decompression). Verify the member's specific plan policy at the plan's provider website.

31

Reading Recommendations

• CPT® Assistant guidance on arthroscopic shoulder debridement (29822/29823) and add-on decompression (29826).

• AAOS coding and coverage resources for shoulder arthroscopy and rotator cuff repair.

• The current eviCore CMM-315 and Carelon Joint Surgery guideline documents (verify version/effective date).

• Peer-reviewed evidence on conservative care prior to elective shoulder surgery and on first-time instability management.

32

Related GoHealthcare Resources (Internal Links)

• GoHealthcare MSK Specialty Procedure Library™ — Rotator Cuff Repair (companion guide).

• GoHealthcare MSK Specialty Procedure Library™ — Labral Repair (companion guide).

• GoHealthcare MSK Specialty Procedure Library™ — Shoulder Replacement and Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty (companion guides).

• GoHealthcare Revenue Cycle Knowledge Center — reimbursement methodology, NCCI/MUE, and fee-schedule detail.

• GoHealthcare Prior Authorization Playbooks and payer-policy watch. Website: https://www.gohealthcarellc.com

33

Recommended Downloads

• Shoulder Arthroscopy Prior Authorization Checklist (one page).

• Conservative-Care Documentation Template (dated fields).

• CPT®-to-Operative-Note Reconciliation Worksheet (29805/29822/29823/29826/29827).

• Denial Response and Peer-to-Peer Preparation Sheet.

34

Visual Recommendations

• High-level shoulder anatomy illustration (glenohumeral joint, labrum, rotator cuff, subacromial space).

• Prior authorization workflow process map (eligibility through scheduling).

• Medical-necessity four-pillar decision tree.

• Payer/UM vendor coverage matrix (eviCore, Carelon, Cohere, Evolent/NIA, TurningPoint).

• CPT® combination reference table with bundling flags (29805, +29826, 29822/29823).

35

Document History

Version	Date	Summary of changes
1.0	July 2026	Initial draft under GoHealthcare Clinical Procedure Guide Standard v1.0. Codes verified against current CPT® / CPT® Assistant and ICD-10-CM FY2026; payer content reflects eviCore CMM-315, Carelon Joint Surgery, Evolent/NIA CG-318, and TurningPoint 2026 updates.
1.1	July 2026	Second-pass code audit. Corrected: removed non-existent ICD-10-CM "M75.61/M75.62" degenerative labral tear codes (ICD-10-GM only) and replaced with verified M75.81/M75.82; corrected shoulder arthroplasty reference from the range "23470–23474" (implies a non-existent 23471) to the discrete codes 23470, 23472, 23473, 23474; added verified M24.411/M24.412 for recurrent instability; added author credentials; corrected running-footer layout collision.

GoHealthcare Performance

Specialty Healthcare Operations Backed by Measurable Results

GoHealthcare Practice Solutions combines MSK specialty expertise, payer intelligence, clinical documentation discipline, prior authorization, and revenue-cycle execution.

25+ Yearsin healthcare operations and management

500+physicians and practice groups served

3.5M+prior authorization requests reviewed, submitted, and processed

98%reported prior authorization approval rate

<1%of reported cases require peer-to-peer review

2%reported prior authorization denial rate

Request Help Explore 22 Healthcare Case Studies

Company-reported performance metrics published by GoHealthcare Practice Solutions. Results vary by client, payer, specialty, case mix, documentation quality, and service scope. Case study library: https://www.gohealthcarellc.com/case-studies.html

36

Educational Disclaimer

Educational Disclaimer

This document is part of the GoHealthcare Practice Solutions Knowledge Center and is intended for educational and operational reference purposes only. It is not a physician training or surgical technique manual and does not replace physician clinical judgment, payer policy review, legal advice, or official CMS guidance. It does not provide procedural technique, implant selection, medication dosing, or physician procedural training. Coverage policies, coding guidance, and reimbursement requirements change frequently and vary by payer and jurisdiction; always verify current CPT®, HCPCS, and ICD-10-CM codes and the applicable payer's current medical policy at the time of service. Developed by Pinky Maniri, MSc, CRCR, CSAPM, CSPPM, CSBI, CSPR, CSAF, Certified in Healthcare A.I. Governance, Founder and Chief Executive Officer of GoHealthcare Practice Solutions.

Developed by Pinky Maniri

Developed by Pinky Maniri, MSc
CRCR · CSAPM · CSPPM · CSBI · CSPR · CSAF
Certified in Healthcare A.I. Governance
Founder & Chief Executive Officer, GoHealthcare Practice Solutions
A Musculoskeletal Specialty Management Services Organization (MSO)
Prior Authorization · Medical Necessity · Payer Intelligence · Revenue Cycle · Operations