Real Practices. Real Numbers.
Real Revenue Recovery.
Every case study below reflects an actual client engagement, documenting denial patterns, specific interventions, and measurable outcomes. No named practices per client preference. Every number is real.
A six-provider orthopedic surgery group in Michigan was experiencing a denial rate significantly
above industry average — concentrated in two categories: global period billing disputes on post-
operative E/M visits, and bilateral procedure modifier mismatches on knee and shoulder
arthroscopy claims. The practice had been with the same billing company for four years. The
billing company had no orthopedic-specific protocol for global period tracking and was applying
Modifier -50 to bilateral procedures for all payers — including commercial payers that require –
RT/-LT with separate line billing.
THE APPROACH
Clientele conducted a 90-day denial audit before onboarding — billing to their PT and OT service
lines six months prior to engaging Clientele. Two protocols were built before the first claim was
submitted: 1) Global period tracking protocol — every surgical claim tracked against its global
period; E/M visits within the global period flagged for modifier review before submission (-24,
-25, -57, or -79 applied based on clinical documentation). 2) Bilateral modifier mapping — payer-
by-payer modifier rule documented for all major payers.
KEY PERFORMANCE METRICS
90-Day Audit Interval
METRIC
BEFORE
AFTER 90 DAYS
Clean claim rate
81%
99%
Global period denial rate
18% of surgical claims
Under 3%
Average A/R days
47 days
31 days
Back-end denial appeal success
No systematic process
78% appeal overturn rate
“Global period disputes were a monthly problem we just accepted as normal. Clientele showed us in the first audit that 80% of them were preventable, wrong modifiers, not wrong billing. Having a protocol made it stop.”
This in-depth case study is currently being assembled with
audited client metrics and will be released pre-launch.
⚠️ COMING SOON
CHIROPRACTIC · ILLINOIS · CLAIMS
Expansion Case: Rehab Compliance & A/R
Recovery
This in-depth case study is currently being assembled with
audited client metrics and will be released pre-launch.
RISK-FREE VERIFICATION
Every Case Study
Starts the Same Way With a Free Audit
Before we take ownership of a single claim, we conduct a deep-dive audit of your current billing workflows, denial patterns, and A/R aging. That audit is free. It’s also where most practices discover what’s actually costing them revenue.
We review your historic denial codes, CPT patterns, and payer performance
logs to identify systemic leakage.
2
Revenue gap report
You receive a documented breakdown of exactly where revenue is being lost,
why claims are being rejected, and their financial recovery potential.
3
Targeted proposal
If the numbers support an engagement, we propose a tailored compliance
scope. If they don’t support it, we will tell you that too.
FEEDBACK FROM CLIENT TEAMS
“Denials dropped significantly within the first fewweeks. The visibility into our claims and the team’s follow-up discipline made an immediate impact something we hadn’t experienced with our previous billing company.”
Revenue Cycle Manager
Multi-Specialty Orthopedics Clinic · Michigan
“Our clean-claim performance improved, A/R became predictable, and for the first time we had reporting that helped us act not just review numbers after the fact.”
Director of Operations
Interventional Pain Management Center · Florida
“We thought RTM/RPM billing was set upcorrectly because our device vendor told us it was. Clientele’s audit showed us four different compliance problems, some were creating overpayment exposure, not just denials. They fixed it systematically, not claim by claim.”
Director of Rehabilitation Services
Multi-Specialty Physical Therapy · New Jersey
Want Results Like These for
Your Practice?
Start with a free RCM audit. No commitment, no obligation just a clear picture of what revenue your practice is leaving on the table and how to get it back.