You just got your audit results back, and there it is. A code marked in error. Except you know it's not an error. You coded it correctly, and you can prove it.
This is the moment that separates coders who defend their work from coders who just let things go.
Here's what to do.
Stop. Don't respond yet.
This is the hardest part, and it's also the most important part. Your first instinct is going to be to fire off a response, especially if you are frustrated or you feel blindsided. Don't. The fastest way to undermine a legitimate rebuttal is to send it before you've done the work.
Before you write a single word back, go to the account. Pull up the chart. Review it again with fresh eyes and a clear head, like you have never seen it before.
Prove what you already know.
You know the documentation is there. That's not enough. You have to be able to show someone else exactly where it is.
Write it down. What note? What date? What page number, if your system uses them? Don't paraphrase the documentation. Quote it exactly, word for word, the way it appears in the chart. Auditors respond to specificity. "The attending's H&P dated March 14th, page 3, states..." is a rebuttal. "The doctor documented it" is not.
Then go to your official references. Are there instructional notes in the tabular list or alphabetic index that support your code selection? Is there a Coding Clinic? A CPT Assistant reference? Write those down too, with the volume, issue, and page if you have it. Vague references don't hold up. Specific ones do.
Now respond.
After you have all of that in front of you, draft your response. Leave the emotion out of it entirely, no matter how justified it feels. You are not trying to win an argument. You are defending your work, and there is a real difference.
Be clear. Be direct. Explain why you believe your codes are correct, and then show your work. Walk the auditor through the documentation and the references the same way you would walk a new coder through a chart.
What not to do.
Never respond when you are still frustrated. If you have to wait a day, wait. A rebuttal written from frustration will read like it was written from frustration, and that immediately shifts the focus off the coding and onto you.
Never cite Google or AI as a reference. That is not a sentence that should ever appear in a formal audit response. Every rebuttal has to be grounded in official resources: instructional notes, guidelines, Coding Clinic, CPT Assistant. AHIMA, AAPC, 3M, Optum, the Merck Manual. These are your references. Everything else is background research, not evidence.
Never respond only with "I disagree" or "you're wrong" or anything that positions this as a confrontation rather than a professional discussion. You are not there to argue. You are there to defend. And your job at this point is to explain to the auditor why you disagree with their recommendations and show them proof.
Every audit is a learning experience.
Sometimes you will submit a rebuttal and the auditor will change their recommendation. Sometimes they won't. Either way, the process of going back through that chart, tracking down every piece of supporting documentation, and writing a clear, sourced response makes you a better coder. It teaches you how to think about documentation before you code, not after.
And sometimes the biggest lesson has nothing to do with the codes at all. Sometimes it's learning how to stay professional in a moment where professional is the last thing you feel.
That matters too.
Share this article