Article Check
#1 in Business Subscribe Email Print

You are here: Home > Business > Business > Medical Billing - The Programmer's Nightmare

Tags

  • thing
  • together
  • carrier
  • first thing
  • medical billing
  • happenedin fixing

  • Links

  • How To Buy Diamonds Online For Ridiculously Low Prices
  • You Must Do This Before You Paint Wrought Iron Doors
  • A Quick Guide To Reflexology
  • Article Check - Medical Billing - The Programmer's Nightmare

    Improving Workplace Morale With Corporate Fun Days
    In any type of business, one of the most important aspects is your employee morale. While this may sound like some type of HR buzzword, it is a vital piece of the puzzle. Unhappy workers produce less work. Not to mention, the quality of the work usually leaves something to be desired. Happy workers produce more quality work. This is a simple
    hould still work. And yet, it didn't. So what they did was put a trace in the code to see exactly what was going on.

    When the trace got to the part of the source code that was fixed, it didn't do what it was supposed to do. It was following the path of the original code. This made no sense. Well, after much investigation they finally found, by accident, that the programmer was using the wrong library routine. Even though the source code was fixed, the object code for it

    Are You Planning For Success?
    Beginning an internet business can seem like climbing Mt Everest in tennis shoes to some of us. You have to make a lot of decisions as to what you are going to market, who you are going to market to, how you are going to market your product and/or services, how much you are going to charge, etc. As the old saying goes, “A journey begins with the
    We take so much for granted in this world. We expect everything we buy to work perfectly and when it doesn't, we throw a tantrum. Well, can you imagine what the programmer who creates your medical billing software feels like when he fixes one bug and then another one pops up? What follows is a true story, which just goes to prove that the truth can sometimes be stranger than fiction.

    A medical billing software company was creating a new software package to bill UB-92 claims. Up until this point in time, they had only done NSF 3.01 specifications. So the first thing they had to do was get the specifications from the carrier and send them off to programming so that the programmer could begin work on them.

    A few weeks passed and the programmer had the specifications completed and was ready to test the module. So they set up some test claims and transmitted them to the carrier. When the test results came back, they showed that there were several fields that were transmitted in error. No problem. The programmer made note of the fields and made the changes. He then transmitted the claims again and waited for the results to come back.

    This is what happened.

    In fixing the fields that were wrong, he inadvertently broke some other fields. Okay, no problem. He would simply fix the fields that he had broken. He proceeded to do this and retransmitted the claims back to the carrier. Much to his puzzlement, the original fields that were broken were broken again. Now he was really scratching his head. He knew he had these fields fixed. He even went over the source code to make sure that the fix was still in. It was. So what was wrong? None of this made any sense.

    Well, he called together the programming team and they all looked at the original code and the fixed code. They all agreed that the fix that the programmer put in to fix the original problem was still there and thus should still work. And yet, it didn't. So what they did was put a trace in the code to see exactly what was going on.

    When the trace got to the part of the source code that was fixed, it didn't do what it was supposed to do. It was following the path of the original code. This made no sense. Well, after much investigation they finally found, by accident, that the programmer was using the wrong library routine. Even though the source code was fixed, the object code for it

    A Normal Product Life Cycle - Some Examples
    A product consists roughly of two main elements. The function of the product – what it does or is capable of doing and the usability of the same: how it does it.Product developments starts often focusing on the first element. Compare for example the evolution of the windows operating system. When the first windows (95) arrived we were all a
    s. Up until this point in time, they had only done NSF 3.01 specifications. So the first thing they had to do was get the specifications from the carrier and send them off to programming so that the programmer could begin work on them.

    A few weeks passed and the programmer had the specifications completed and was ready to test the module. So they set up some test claims and transmitted them to the carrier. When the test results came back, they showed that there were several fields that were transmitted in error. No problem. The programmer made note of the fields and made the changes. He then transmitted the claims again and waited for the results to come back.

    This is what happened.

    In fixing the fields that were wrong, he inadvertently broke some other fields. Okay, no problem. He would simply fix the fields that he had broken. He proceeded to do this and retransmitted the claims back to the carrier. Much to his puzzlement, the original fields that were broken were broken again. Now he was really scratching his head. He knew he had these fields fixed. He even went over the source code to make sure that the fix was still in. It was. So what was wrong? None of this made any sense.

    Well, he called together the programming team and they all looked at the original code and the fixed code. They all agreed that the fix that the programmer put in to fix the original problem was still there and thus should still work. And yet, it didn't. So what they did was put a trace in the code to see exactly what was going on.

    When the trace got to the part of the source code that was fixed, it didn't do what it was supposed to do. It was following the path of the original code. This made no sense. Well, after much investigation they finally found, by accident, that the programmer was using the wrong library routine. Even though the source code was fixed, the object code for it

    Young Beef Cattle Bull Notes and Reminders
    Yearling bulls should be well grown but not too fat. The energy content of a ration should be reduced if bulls are getting too fat. Fat bulls may fatigue rapidly, contributing to fewer cows conceiving.For a yearling bull to be used successfully, he should have reached puberty 3 to 4 months before breeding time. The age of a bull at puber
    al fields that were transmitted in error. No problem. The programmer made note of the fields and made the changes. He then transmitted the claims again and waited for the results to come back.

    This is what happened.

    In fixing the fields that were wrong, he inadvertently broke some other fields. Okay, no problem. He would simply fix the fields that he had broken. He proceeded to do this and retransmitted the claims back to the carrier. Much to his puzzlement, the original fields that were broken were broken again. Now he was really scratching his head. He knew he had these fields fixed. He even went over the source code to make sure that the fix was still in. It was. So what was wrong? None of this made any sense.

    Well, he called together the programming team and they all looked at the original code and the fixed code. They all agreed that the fix that the programmer put in to fix the original problem was still there and thus should still work. And yet, it didn't. So what they did was put a trace in the code to see exactly what was going on.

    When the trace got to the part of the source code that was fixed, it didn't do what it was supposed to do. It was following the path of the original code. This made no sense. Well, after much investigation they finally found, by accident, that the programmer was using the wrong library routine. Even though the source code was fixed, the object code for it

    Why You Need Ergonomically Correct Office Furniture
    Most people spend long hours each week in their office, making it very important to have the right style of furniture. While comfort is important, you really need to be more focused on the office furniture being ergonomically correct then on the color or material of it.You will feel much better at the end of the work day, and have more ener
    original fields that were broken were broken again. Now he was really scratching his head. He knew he had these fields fixed. He even went over the source code to make sure that the fix was still in. It was. So what was wrong? None of this made any sense.

    Well, he called together the programming team and they all looked at the original code and the fixed code. They all agreed that the fix that the programmer put in to fix the original problem was still there and thus should still work. And yet, it didn't. So what they did was put a trace in the code to see exactly what was going on.

    When the trace got to the part of the source code that was fixed, it didn't do what it was supposed to do. It was following the path of the original code. This made no sense. Well, after much investigation they finally found, by accident, that the programmer was using the wrong library routine. Even though the source code was fixed, the object code for it

    The Most Important Gift you can Give to Your Family is Your Time
    As we all work hard to grow in our careers, we must not lose sight of what is most important in life. Sure, it's great to drive a great car, live in a comfortable neighborhood and "keep up with the Joneses," but there is more to it all than that. At the root of everything is providing for our families, which are there for us through thick and thin
    hould still work. And yet, it didn't. So what they did was put a trace in the code to see exactly what was going on.

    When the trace got to the part of the source code that was fixed, it didn't do what it was supposed to do. It was following the path of the original code. This made no sense. Well, after much investigation they finally found, by accident, that the programmer was using the wrong library routine. Even though the source code was fixed, the object code for it was not placed in the library so it wasn't being processed.

    These are the kind of nightmare's that programmers go through all the time. So the next time you open up your medical billing software and it doesn't quite work the way you expected it to, please remember that there is a human being on the other end who's as frustrated as you are by the whole thing.

    HTTP = HTML link (for blogs, profiles,phorums):
    <a href="http://www.caseupon.com/article/1845/caseupon-Medical-Billing--The-Programmers-Nightmare.html">Medical Billing - The Programmer's Nightmare</a>

    BB link (for phorums):
    [url=http://www.caseupon.com/article/1845/caseupon-Medical-Billing--The-Programmers-Nightmare.html]Medical Billing - The Programmer's Nightmare[/url]

    Related Articles:

    Are Noise Control Products a Solution for Background Noise in Schools?

    Corporate Gift Idea Catalogs

    Medical Billing - Many Players, Many Problems

    Bookmark it: del.icio.us digg.com reddit.com netvouz.com google.com yahoo.com technorati.com furl.net bloglines.com socialdust.com ma.gnolia.com newsvine.com slashdot.org simpy.com shadows.com blinklist.com