Cigna’s new R49 policy (effective Oct 1, 2025) and Aetna’s expanded Claim & Code Review Program (effective Sep 1, 2025) both allow insurers to automatically downcode Evaluation & Management (E/M) visits when documentation does not fully support higher-level codes such as CPT codes 99204, 99205, 99214, 99215, 99244, and 99245.This “deny-first, pay-later” approach poses risks to physician revenue, administrative burden, and potentially patient access. Providers must document thoroughly, monitor remittances, and appeal aggressively to protect reimbursement.
Definition:
E/M downcoding is the process by which insurance payers adjust (reduce) the reimbursement for high-level visits if proper documentation is lacking.Downcoding occurs when a payer changes a claim submitted at a higher E/M level (e.g. 99214, 99215) to a lower-level code (e.g. 99213), thereby paying less than what the provider billed.
Definition:
Modern downcoding is often driven by claim-editing software algorithms, sometimes with minimal or no clinical review of documentation. (American Medical Association)
Differing from denials:
Unlike a denial, which refuses payment, downcoding pays—but at a lower level. Many practices may not spot the adjustment unless they carefully review remittance advice and EOBs.
Why insurers do it :
As payers look for cost savings, downcoding allows them to reduce payments in aggregate, especially under large volumes of claims. (asipp.org)
Cigna and Aetna target these CPT codes for downcoding, effective October 1 and September 1, 2025:
New patient, moderate/high complexity
Established patient, moderate/high complexity
Consultation, moderate/high complexity
The Texas Medical Association (TMA) also reported that the R49 policy does not apply universally. Cigna confirmed that individual physicians may request removal from the review process after appealing five downcoded claims. If those appeals show that at least 80% were billed appropriately, the physician can bypass future downcoding reviews. Notably, this exemption applies at the individual physician level, not the group level (TMA).
“Providers meeting the 80% threshold after 5 appeals may request exemption from ongoing downcoding reviews (applies at the individual physician level, not group).”
Providers may face:
When reimbursement is reduced, physicians may shift toward higher volume, lower-risk patients or consolidate into larger systems, risking access and continuity of care.
Ambient and real-time AI can listen to encounters and document thoroughly, ensuring complexity, MDM, and time are fully captured. This reduces undercoding and protects against payer downcoding.
Even with AI, providers must confirm that notes clearly reflect MDM, time spent, and clinical decision making in alignment with AMA E/M guidelines.
Downcoding adjustments often fly under the radar. Practices must review EOBs regularly to catch when payers reduce reimbursement.
Submit full encounter records when higher-level coding is justified. Frequent appeals improve chances of recovering revenue and, in Aetna’s case, may lead to removal from ongoing monitoring.
Avoid unspecified codes and ensure coding reflects the documented complexity.
Reinforce correct coding logic and how documentation supports billing at the appropriate level.
Cigna’s R49 policy and Aetna’s CCRP expansion mark a new era of payer-driven downcoding. It’s a shift that favors payer cost control over transparency, provider autonomy, and fair payment. For providers, the takeaway is clear: documentation is now under a microscope. Practices must invest in better note-taking(eg: mirro.ai), proactive auditing, and consistent appeals to avoid revenue leakage.
By staying vigilant — and embracing smarter documentation tools — providers can safeguard compliance and protect the revenue they rightfully earn.