Living Legend William Dettwyler, MT, Looks Back at Seven Decades in the Clinical Laboratory Profession

Dettwyler is set to retire at age 92 after a long career helping clinical laboratories with their coding and billing systems

When William Dettwyler, MT, began working in a clinical laboratory, Harry Truman was president of the United States and scientists had not yet discovered the structure of DNA. Now, as he approaches his 92nd birthday in March, he is finally ready to retire from a career that has spanned more than seven decades, from bench work as a medical laboratory technician (MLT) to assisting labs with their medical coding and medical billing challenges.

Along the way, one of his coding innovations helped the State of Oregon save substantial sums in its Medicaid program. He also helped many medical laboratories increase reimbursement by correcting their coding mistakes. This from someone who left school after eighth grade to help on his family’s farm in rural Oregon.

In an exclusive interview with Dark Daily, Dettwyler discusses his long career and offered pointers for labs on improving their coding and reimbursement procedures.

Back in the 1980s, when he began his consulting work for labs, “they were very poor at billing,” he recalled. “Hospital billing staff didn’t understand lab coding. Reference laboratories didn’t do a good job of picking the right codes or even billing all the codes. Up until around the 1970s, hospitals didn’t even have to bill individual lab procedures with CPT codes. They billed with a revenue center code for all their lab services.”

These days “people are much more sophisticated,” he notes. “There are fewer coding problems compared to what it was in the 1980s and 1990s up to the 2010s.” However, he says he still has a handful of clients who call on his expertise.

“It was not unusual to go to a large university medical center and in three days tell the CFO on my exit review that the following year their lab would bring in about a half million more in revenue, just from my coding review. But I did not reveal to them that I had only gone to the eighth grade in a little one room school and was the lone graduate in my eighth-grade class,” wrote William Dettwyler, MT (above), owner of Codus Medicus in Salem, Ore., in an article he penned for Medical Laboratory Observer. For 75 years Dettwyler worked in the clinical laboratory industry. For much of that time he helped labs all over America improve their coding and reimbursement systems. (Photo copyright: LinkedIn.)

How It All Began

Dettwyler got his first taste of lab work in the early 1950s as a teenager washing glassware for a medical laboratory technician at a local medical practice. A few years later he completed an MLT program at Oregon Institute of Technology in Klamath Falls and landed his first lab tech job at a clinic in Portland.

His entry to consulting came in the early 1970s while he was working for a medical group in Salem. “I was helping the accounting personnel with their billing and noticed that Medicaid was not paying for a common test for syphilis that I was performing,” he recalled. “I contacted Medicaid, and they told me they didn’t understand laboratory procedures.”

After that, “they started to call me frequently with laboratory questions,” he said. “It wasn’t long before they asked me to help them on a part-time basis.” He also assisted with questions related to radiology.

By 1976, Dettwyler was devoting 35 hours a week to assisting the state Medicaid agency while still working as a lab tech.

Simple Hack Ends Overpayments

One of his career highlights came around 1981, when he discovered that the agency was overpaying for some pathology and radiology procedures by as much as 200%.

“Pathologists and radiologists are paid based on whether they are performing the complete procedure—the technical component and the professional component—or just the professional component, where they interpret the results,” he explained.

When billing for just the professional component, the physicians would add two digits to the standard code, so it might come in as 88305-26. However, the state’s computer system could only accommodate a five-digit code, so the state was paying as if the providers had done everything.

“The computer techs said the software couldn’t handle a seven-digit number in a five-digit box, so I devised a way for the computer to read the equivalent of seven digits,” he recalled.

His solution was to modify the codes so that the last digit was an alphabetic character. Instead of billing for code 88305-26, the physicians would bill for 8830F, and the state would pay them correctly.

Around that time, Dettwyler also began assisting a Medicare office in Portland. This forced him to cut back on his work as a lab tech. But he still worked around 60 hours a week.

“For most of my life, I’ve worked three jobs,” he said. “Work is my hobby.” He also had a large family to support—by 1976, he and his wife had 10 kids.

Transition to Lab Consulting

In 1986, the state was facing a budget shortfall and cut its Medicaid consultants, so Dettwyler decided to seek consulting work with labs while continuing to work at the bench.

“I really liked the coding because I had very little competition,” he said. “But I wanted to keep working in the laboratory mainly to understand the problems.”

While working for the state, Dettwyler attended coding seminars and workshops. He noticed that labs were losing revenue due to poor billing practices. “They didn’t understand all the coding complexities, so they really hungered for this kind of assistance.”

But first, he had to find clients. So he partnered with another lab tech who was offering similar consulting services.

Business picked up after Dettwyler contributed an article to the trade publication Medical Laboratory Observer about his process, which he calls “procedure code verification and post payment analysis.”

“That went like gangbusters,” he said. “We started getting calls from all over the country.”

Dettwyler later split from his partner and went to work on his own.

“I would sit down with the person who was responsible for coding, usually the lab or radiology manager,” he explained. “We would go over the chargemaster and cover every procedure to make sure the code and units were correct. When I was done, I would give them a report of what codes we changed and why we changed them.”

Beginning in 1989, he signed on as a contractor for another consultancy, Health Systems Concepts on the East Coast, where he remained until 2019.

Advice to the Current Generation

What is Dettwyler’s advice for someone who wants to follow in his footsteps and assist labs with their coding? “I wouldn’t recommend it now,” he said. “There’s less need for that kind of assistance than in the past.”

However, he does find that labs still run into problems. The greatest need, he says, is in molecular diagnostics, due to the complexity of the procedures.

In addition, labs are sometimes confused by coding for therapeutic drug monitoring, in which a doctor is gauging a patient’s reaction to a therapy versus screening for substance abuse. “Those issues are often misunderstood,” he said.

Microbiology also poses coding challenges, he noted, because of the steps required to identify the pathogen and determine antibiotic susceptibility. “It requires quite a bit of additional coding,” he said. “Some labs don’t understand that they can’t just bill a code for culture and sensitivity. They have to bill for the individual portions.”

Labs that work with reference labs also have to be careful to verify codes for specific procedures. “I’ll review the codes used by reference labs and, surprisingly, they’re not always correct. Reference labs sometimes get it wrong.”

If someone does want to become a coding expert, Dettwyler suggests that “they should first have experience as a lab tech, especially in microbiology, because of the additional coding. And they should try to work with somebody who is already doing it. Then, they should work with the billing department to learn how it operates.”

He also advises clinical laboratory managers to follow the latest developments in the field by reading lab publications such as The Dark Report. “You have to do that to keep current,” he said.

Despite never completing high school, Dettwyler eventually received his GED and an associate degree. “But the degrees didn’t really help me,” he said. “Much of it was on-the-job training and keeping my eyes open and listening.”                     

Stephen Beale

Related Information:

Seventy-five Years Beside the Microscope

History of the Clinical Laboratory Critical Values Reporting System

Development of the Critical Values system redefined what STAT means in clinical laboratory testing turnaround times

Where did the concept of critical values and having clinical laboratories report them to referring physicians originate? How did the concept blossom into a standard practice in laboratory medicine? Given the importance of critical values, a lookback into how this aspect of laboratory medicine was developed is helpful to understand how and why this has become an essential element in the practice of medicine and an opportunity for labs to add value in patient care.

According to Stanford Medicine, critical/panic values are defined as “values that are outside the normal range to a degree that may constitute an immediate health risk to the individual or require immediate action on the part of the ordering physician.”

In an article he penned for the National Medical Journal of India, George Lundberg, MD, Editor-at-Large at Medscape, states that the practice of reporting critical values originated with a case that occurred in 1969 at the Los Angeles County-University of Southern California Medical Center. Lundberg is also Editor-in-Chief at Cancer Commons, President and Chair of the Board of Directors of the Lundberg Institute, and a clinical professor of pathology at Northwestern University.

What you’ll read below is an insider’s account of the “birth of critical values reporting.”

According to Lundberg, an unaccompanied man was brought to the hospital in a coma and an examination revealed a laceration to his scalp. The patient was admitted to the neurosurgical unit where clinical laboratory tests were performed, including a complete blood count (CBC) analysis, urinalysis, and serum electrolytes. All the test results came back normal except the patient’s serum glucose (blood sugar level) which was 6 mg% in concentration.

“The hard-copy laboratory results were returned to the ward of origin within two hours of receipt of the specimens in the laboratory. However, the results were not noticed by the house officers who were busy with several other seriously ill patients. Ward personnel also failed to communicate the lab results to the responsible physicians,” Lundberg wrote.

When hospital staff did finally notice the test result the next morning glucose was immediately administered to the patient, but it was too late to prevent irreversible brain damage. The man soon passed away.

Following this incident, the hospital developed a “Critical Value Recognition and Reporting System.” The system generated new numbers that were termed “Panic Values.” 

However, “critics complained that good doctors should never panic, so the name was changed to Critical Values,” Lundberg explained.

When any of these critical test values were out of the norm, “we required the responsible laboratory person to quickly verify the result and use the telephone (long before laboratory computers) to personally notify a responsible individual (no messages left) who agreed to find a physician who could quickly act on the result. All was documented with times and names,” he wrote. 

“We understand that when a physician wants something, he/she wants it, no matter what. Well, in this patient-focused approach, the physician cannot have it, except as offered by the patient-focused approach, based on TAT [turnaround times of clinical laboratory tests],” wrote George Lundberg, MD (above), President and Chair of the Board of Directors of the Lundberg Institute, and Clinical Professor of Pathology at Northwestern University in an article he penned for the National Medical Journal of India (Photo copyright: Dark Intelligence Group. Shows Dr. Lundberg in 2011 addressing the Executive War College on Diagnostics, Clinical Laboratory, and Pathology Management.)

New Clinical Laboratory Standards

Recognition of the urgency to adopt new hospital standards related to certain clinical laboratory test results came swiftly. In 1972, Lundberg was invited to publish an article explaining the new Critical Value Recognition and Reporting System in Medical Laboratory Observer

“Within weeks, laboratories all over the USA adopted their own version of the system,” Lundberg wrote in his National Medical Journal of India (NMJI) article. “The test chosen, and critical values, were established by each medical staff. … A critical value system quickly became standard of practice as required by the College of American Pathologists (CAP) Laboratory Accreditation Program and the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals.”

According to Lundberg, “most laboratory tests that are done do not need to be done; the results are either negative, normal, or show no change from a prior result. But some are crucial.”

The original set of Critical Values included the following testing results:

The list of values were later expanded to include “vital values.” These values describe lab results for which “action” is important, but where timing is less urgent. Examples of vital values include:

STAT Lab Orders Redefined

Lundberg and his colleagues went on to redefine what constitutes a laboratory test and what renders a test successful. They discussed laboratory procedures with committees of clinicians, lab personnel and patients, and reorganized hematology, chemistry, and toxicology based on the turnaround time (TAT) of tests.

“We ‘started the clock’—any and all days/times 24×7—when a specimen arrived at some place within the laboratory, and stopped the clock when a final result was available somewhere in the laboratory,” Lundberg wrote in NMJI. “We categorized all tests as: less than one hour, less than four hours, less than 24 hours, and more than 24 hours, guaranteed, 24×7. As a trade-off, we abolished the concept of ‘STAT’ orders … NO EXCEPTIONS. The rationale of each TAT was the speed with which a result was needed to render proper medical care that mattered to the welfare of the patient, and, of course, that was technically possible.”

Since then, very little has changed for the Critical Values System over the past 50 years. The majority of values added have fallen under the “Vital” category and not the “Critical” category. Today, most health systems and clinical laboratories create their own internal processes and procedures regarding which values need to be reported immediately (critical), which values are not urgent (vital), and how those results should be handled.

—JP Schlingman

Related Information:

The Origin and Evolution of Critical Laboratory Values

Critical Values

Critical Laboratory Values Communication: Summary Recommendations from Available Guidelines

Clinical Laboratories Turn to Healthcare-Focused CRM to Optimize Operations and Increase Market Share, Despite Decreasing Reimbursement

With more medical laboratories making progress on improving the operational performance of their labs, and the level of service they provide to their clients, they are finding it essential to have real-time analytics and healthcare relationship management systems

In today’s world of clinical laboratory medicine, the pace of daily operations continues to increase. Everything happens faster as the nation’s leading medical laboratories apply Lean and other process improvement methods to speed up workflow with the goal of shortening lab test turnaround times.

However, those labs making progress on doing more faster and in less time have a challenge: they require information systems and software that can feed essential information to lab managers and staff in real time. It is for this reason that some of the best-selling informatics products in the clinical laboratory industry these days are middleware solutions and healthcare relationship management (HRM) solutions that support real-time analytics and help medical labs improve their client service.

In the past, clinical laboratories and pathology groups often developed in-house solutions to help manage data and generate reports. While data in these systems often drove diagnostic decisions, with the pace of technological change and demands for reduced turnaround times (TATs), these systems often struggled to provide: (more…)

Good News for Clinical Labs and Phlebotomists: Safety-engineered Devices Reduce Needlestick Injuries

Hospital studies consistently show safety-engineered devices reduce needlestick injuries

Plebotomists and safety managers in clinical laboratories across the nation will welcome the results of several studies on phlebotomy needlestick injuries. Evidence is accumulating that use of safety-engineered devices (SED) contributes to fewer reports of accidental needle sticks.

Some experts consider this to be one more example of how focused, concerted attention to a problem in medical laboratory safety standards can encourage innovative solutions. Several hospital studies show a significant reduction in phlebotomy needlestick injuries (NSI). These studies tracked needlestick injuries following passage of legislation in 2000 and the requirement of safety-engineered devices (SEDs).

(more…)

Clinical Laboratory Leader from Uganda Wins Scholarship, Takes New Knowledge Back to Uganda

Scholarship program for aspiring clinical laboratory managers helps them sharpen their skills

Over in Africa, one of Uganda’s main clinical laboratory organizations is about to go “Lean.” Credit for that development goes to one intrepid medical laboratory leader and his trip across the Atlantic to participate at the Executive War College on Lab and Pathology (EWC) that took place in New Orleans last May.

Faithful readers of Dark Daily will remember Ali Elbireer, MT (ASC). He was this year’s winner of a unique clinical laboratory education scholarship that is awarded annually by The Dark Report and Medical Laboratory Observer. This scholarship is designed to advance the medical laboratory management skills and careers of the clinical laboratory industry’s most promising “up and comers.” (See Dark Daily, “ Teaching the Next Generation of Clinical Pathology Laboratory Managers, April 11, 2011“.)

(more…)

;