HI255 Unit 8 Evaluation and Management Case Example

Reviewed by Chester Goodwin, MBA Medical Coding II Purdue University Global Free custom sample in 24 to 48h

This HI255 Unit 8 evaluation and management case scores one composite office visit on medical decision making and finds the billed level one step too high. Purdue Global HI 255 teaches BS in Health Information Management students the office visit framework in force since 2021, in which the amount of history and exam written down stopped deciding the level. The patient is an established 58-year-old with home blood pressures of 152 to 164 on two medicines and new seasonal hay fever. Problems, data and risk each reach moderate: a progressing chronic illness, two results reviewed plus one test ordered, and a dose change. Two of three elements set the level, so the note supports the fourth level, not the fifth. No total time is recorded, so the time route cannot rescue it either.

CourseHI255 Medical Coding II
UnitUnit 8
Paper typeEvaluation and management case
LengthAbout 860 words, 6 pages double-spaced
FormatAPA 7 student paper
SchoolPurdue University Global
ProgramBS in Health Information Management
UpdatedOctober 2026

Free sample paper for HI255 Unit 8

1

Moderate on Two of Three: A Unit 8 Evaluation and Management Case Scoring One Established Office Visit by Medical Decision Making and Finding Support for One Level Below the Level Billed

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

HI255: Medical Coding II

Unit 8 Evaluation and Management Case

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The patient, practice and progress note are composite; the office visit guidelines, policy documents and sources cited are real.

What this part is doingNaming the framework in the first section prevents the most common error in this unit, scoring the history and examination as if they still set the level.
2

The Framework Applied

For office visits billed from 2021 onward, the level rests either on the physician's decision making or on the physician's total time spent that same day. History and examination must be documented as medically appropriate, but they no longer set the level (American Medical Association, 2025). Decision making is judged on three things: which problems the physician dealt with and how serious they were, what results, records and tests the physician looked at or ordered, and how risky the treatment choices were. Any two of those three reaching a level is enough to give the visit that level (Medicare Learning Network, 2024).

The Note in Brief

A composite 58-year-old man with hypertension, on lisinopril and amlodipine, brings a home log showing morning readings between 152 and 164 systolic over the last month. He also has two weeks of sneezing, itchy eyes and a clear runny nose that started when the trees began to bloom. The physician reviewed his basic metabolic panel from last month and a lipid panel from the spring, ordered a urine albumin to creatinine ratio, increased amlodipine from 5 mg to 10 mg, and advised an over the counter nasal steroid spray. Follow-up was set for four weeks. No total time is recorded.

Scoring Grid

1. Problems addressed. Evidence: hypertension not at goal despite two medicines, which is a chronic illness with exacerbation or progression; seasonal allergic rhinitis, an acute uncomplicated illness. Level reached: moderate, because one chronic illness that is progressing meets moderate on its own. It stops short of high, which needs a long-term illness that has worsened severely or a problem that threatens life or bodily function.

2. Data reviewed and analyzed. Evidence: review of the result of each unique test, two items, and ordering a unique test, one item. Level reached: moderate, because three items in the first category meet it. It stops short of extensive, which would need a second category, such as an independent reading of a tracing or a discussion of management with an outside physician.

3. Risk of patient management. Evidence: prescription drug management, a dose change of amlodipine. Level reached: moderate. It stops short of high, which would need something like a decision about hospitalization or drug therapy needing intensive monitoring for toxicity.

All three elements land on moderate. For the billed level to hold, two of them would have had to reach high, and none of them comes close.

What this part is doingEach row states why it stops short of the next level, which is the comparison graders use to decide whether the scorer understood the table or simply matched words.
3

Verdict

With problems, data and risk all at moderate, the visit meets moderate complexity medical decision making, which supports the established patient office visit at the fourth level. The fifth level, which was billed, requires high complexity in two of the three elements.

What the History and Examination Add

The note carries a full review of systems and a detailed examination of the heart, lungs, nose and eyes. Under the older rules, that much history and examination would have pushed the level up. Under the current framework it earns nothing toward the level, though it still matters: the examination of the nose and eyes is what supports the allergy diagnosis, and the blood pressure taken twice in the office is part of what shows the hypertension is not at goal. A coder who counts bullet points from the examination is applying rules that no longer govern office visits, and a grader will notice. The same is true of the medication list and the social history. They belong in the note because they are clinically appropriate, and they help a reader understand the dose change, but they do not change the level. The scoring above uses only what the physician addressed, reviewed, ordered and decided.

The Time Route

An office visit can also be leveled by total time, which counts the physician's time on the date of the encounter, including reviewing results, examining, counseling and documenting. The fifth level for an established patient requires at least 40 minutes. The note records no total time, so time cannot support the higher level. If the physician had spent and recorded 40 minutes on that date, the higher level would have been supported by time even with moderate decision making.

A Note on Level Inflation

The difference between the two top levels is a meaningful part of a primary care practice's revenue, and payers watch the share of visits billed at the highest level. Research on hospitals adopting electronic records found no clear evidence that the systems drove up billing intensity, but the concern about templates that make every note look complex has not gone away (Adler-Milstein & Jha, 2014). The answer here is not an accusation. It is to code from the decision making the note describes and, where physicians want time credited, to ask that total time be documented.

What this part is doingEnding on documentation rather than blame keeps the compliance point practical for a coder who will have to discuss it with the physician.
4

References

Adler-Milstein, J., & Jha, A. K. (2014). No evidence found that hospitals are using new electronic health records to increase Medicare reimbursements. Health Affairs, 33(7), 1271-1277. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2014.0023

American Medical Association. (2025). CPT 2026 professional edition. American Medical Association.

Medicare Learning Network. (2024). Evaluation and management services guide (MLN006764). Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

The Purdue Global HI255 Unit 8 instructions

The eighth unit usually provides an office or outpatient note and asks you to assign the visit level with full reasoning. You are expected to state which framework applies, identify whether the patient is new or established, and score the three decision making elements: problems addressed, data reviewed and analyzed, and risk of management. Many prompts give the level that was billed and ask whether the note supports it. Expect to explain why each element stops where it does, not only where it lands. Time is the alternative route, so check whether total time on the date is documented and whether it meets the threshold. Some instructors add a compliance question about level inflation. Cite the CPT evaluation and management guidelines and a Medicare reference, and keep the note composite.

How the HI 255 Unit 8 example is put together

The case starts with the framework, explaining that decision making or total time sets the level and that two of three elements decide. The note is summarized in one paragraph with every scored fact included. A numbered grid follows, one row per element, each with the evidence, the level reached and the reason it stops short of the next. A highlighted line states that all three elements land on moderate and none comes close to high. The verdict paragraph names the supported level. A section on history and examination explains why the detailed review of systems adds nothing to the level while still supporting the diagnoses. The time route is tested next, with the 40-minute threshold. A closing note on level inflation cites research on electronic records and billing intensity and recommends documenting time.

Where the points sit in the HI255 Unit 8 rubric

Visit level cases are usually graded on the final level and on the scoring that produced it. The largest share goes to each element scored correctly with evidence, so a right level reached by the wrong path loses points. Instructors look closely at the data element, where students often count items in the wrong category, and at the risk element, where prescription drug management is the usual moderate marker. Explaining why an element does not reach the next level earns credit in most rubrics. The time route is often its own item. Students who apply the older history and examination rules lose a large share. A short, fair compliance discussion and correct citations to the CPT guidelines and a Medicare guide complete the marks in most sections of HI 255.

HI255 Unit 8 help: mistakes that cost points

The most expensive error is scoring the history and examination as if the pre-2021 rules still applied, which inflates nearly every office visit. Students also miscount data, counting the same test twice or treating a test ordered and later reviewed as two separate items. Another common slip is reading any medicine as prescription drug management, including over the counter advice. Some cases skip the time route or apply the wrong threshold. Compliance sections that accuse the physician of fraud lose points for tone and for unsupported claims. We can level the note in your assignment with each element scored and the reason it stops where it does. Send the note, the level billed if given, and whether your instructor wants the time route discussed.

Get an HI255 Unit 8 example written to your instructions

Upload the encounter note from your Unit 8 case, the instructions and the rubric, and indicate if your course scores by decision making, time or both. The scoring grid, the supported level and the comparison with the level reported are returned in 24-48h. The first custom sample is provided free. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.

More HI255 papers and BS in Health Information Management samples

HI255 Unit 8 questions, answered

Why does the history not raise the visit level?

Under the current office visit framework, history and examination are documented as medically appropriate but are not scored to choose the level. The level comes from medical decision making or total practitioner time on the date of the encounter. A thorough history still matters clinically, and a note without one may raise other concerns, but it does not move the level up.

Would the level change if time were documented?

Possibly. If the note recorded total practitioner time on the date of the encounter that met the threshold for a higher level, time could support it even with moderate decision making. The sample's note records no total time, so that route is closed. Many Unit 8 cases include a variation with time documented to test whether the two pathways are understood as alternatives.

Does it matter whether the patient is new or established?

Yes, because the two use separate code families with different level structures. An established patient is one who received professional services from the same physician, or another physician of the same specialty in the same group, within the previous three years. The sample's patient is established, and a case that misclassifies the patient type picks from the wrong family entirely.

Where can I find a free HI255 Unit 8 sample paper?

The complete Unit 8 evaluation and management case is on this page, scoring one office visit at moderate decision making and comparing it with the level billed.

Does a detailed examination raise an office visit level?

Not under the current framework. Examination and history are documented as appropriate, but the level is set by the decision making or by the physician's total minutes that day.