TAC presses DMS on sources of new CDT dental codes and orthodontics coding alignment

TAC members on Aug. 7 questioned where some niche dental CDT codes originate and whether TAC input is incorporated before codes are added.

Justin Deranger said codes come from multiple sources — previous TAC members or their subgroups, MCO dental directors, CMS and other states — and that DMS conducts policy, clinical and actuarial reviews before adopting codes. "About 70% of the codes came from the previous dental tech," Deranger said, acknowledging past contributions from technical experts and prior TAC membership. He invited TAC recommendations and offered to provide documentation.

Providers raised a separate concern about orthodontics nomenclature: state fee‑for‑service uses a different code set than many MCOs. A TAC member warned that rebasing could produce misalignment unless the state and MCOs adopt consistent coding. Justin Deranger said DMS will move to a model used by other states and recommended by TAC to make fee‑for‑service and MCO coding more consistent.

Why it matters: Code provenance and consistent coding affect claim processing, provider payments and access for specific specialties (orthodontics, oral surgery). TAC asked DMS to share underlying documentation and clarified that providers expect consistent coding across fee‑for‑service and managed care.

Representative quote: "So most of that information came from the TAC," Deranger said when describing sources of prior code additions.

Ending: DMS asked providers to send any missing codes for follow‑up; DMS staff agreed to check on a specific sedation/anesthesia code (9244) flagged by a TAC member.