Multi-Specialty Medical live
E&M-dominant coding, provider productivity vs MGMA, and payer-specific collections across specialties.By specialty
5 specialties · wRVU vs MGMA median| Specialty | Rev / visit | Visits / day | NCR | wRVU (K) | vs MGMA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary Care | $168 | 22 | 96.1% | 5.2 | -0.2 |
| Cardiology | $312 | 18 | 95.4% | 8.9 | -0.2 |
| Orthopedics | $421 | 16 | 94.8% | 10.6 | +0.4 |
| Gastroenterology | $358 | 15 | 95% | 9.3 | -0.2 |
| Behavioral Health | $142 | 12 | 93.2% | 4.1 | +0.1 |
E&M coding distribution
Established-patient visits vs coding benchmark — under-coding is left-on-the-table revenue| Code | Level | Your mix | Benchmark | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 99213 | Level 3 (low) | 48% | 38% | +10pt |
| 99214 | Level 4 (moderate) | 44% | 52% | -8pt |
| 99215 | Level 5 (high) | 8% | 10% | -2pt |
What the model sees
Grounded read across the specialtiesCoding under-leakage: 99214 is 44% of established visits vs a 52% benchmark — a 8-point gap. If the documentation supports it, that down-coding is real revenue left on the table; audit the chart-to-code step before assuming volume is the problem.
Primary Care and Cardiology and Gastroenterology run below the MGMA median wRVU — capacity, not effort: tighten templates and no-show recovery before adding providers. Orthopedics is above median and is carrying the group's productivity.
Primary Care is the new-patient funnel that feeds the proceduralists — protect its access. Behavioral Health is the most value-based-exposed line, so its lower fee-for-service NCR understates its true contribution; attribute the downstream value before judging it on collections alone.