Back Pain ICD-10 Guide: Avoid Common Coding Errors

Back Pain ICD 10: Find the Right Code Beyond M54.9

Back Pain ICD 10: Find the Right Code Beyond M54.9

Quick Answer: The back pain ICD 10 code is M54.9, dorsalgia, unspecified, when the record identifies back pain without a more specific location or diagnosis. Use M54.50 for unspecified low back pain, M54.6 for thoracic spine pain, and M54.2 for cervicalgia. Code the condition supported by the documentation.

Deciding on a back pain code becomes difficult when the assessment, imaging report and EHR diagnosis list, tell different stories. A broad symptom code may not capture the details of the documentation. An unsupported diagnosis may not reflect the true nature of the case. This resource discusses the different details that will change which code should be assigned, combinations of codes that should be reviewed together, and most importantly, how to justify the case with the available information. Use the comparison table to discuss the different cases, and review the examples to verify your thinking.  

M54.9 and the Meaning of Unspecified Back Pain

Dorsalgia refers to any type of pain in the back. M54.9 is assigned when back pain is documented, but the case record does not provide additional information about the pain, e.g. the level of the spine involved, the injured structures, or a neurologic disorder. Consider an assessment that simply states “back pain” and no other information is provided elsewhere in the documentation. “Back pain” in the assessment can be coded M54.9. If the assessment states “low back pain,” M54.9 would not be appropriate and the assessment must provide additional information about the lower back pain in order to assign an appropriate code. The term “unspecified” indicates the level of detail provided for classification. The code assigned does not imply the back pain is minor or imaginary. A thorough clinical evaluation may establish the diagnosis of the symptom, even when the cause is unknown. WHO describes some characteristics of nonspecific low back pain and back pain that is attributable to a specific disease or structural condition. This clinical differentiation helps to explain a symptom diagnosis; it is not a substitution to ICD-10-CM coding instructions. In the U.S. use ICD-10-CM, the CDC’s/NCHS’s clinical modification of the classification. WHO has the international classification. The U.S. coding procedures and resources are developed by CDC/NCHS and CMS.

Main Back Pain Codes at a Glance

These codes represent different documented conditions. Select the matching entry rather than treating the table as a list of interchangeable alternatives.
Code ICD-10-CM description Documentation that supports considering it
M54.9 Dorsalgia, unspecified Back pain without a more specific location or diagnosis
M54.50 Low back pain, unspecified Low back pain without a more specific classification
M54.51 Vertebrogenic low back pain A documented diagnosis of vertebrogenic low back pain
M54.59 Other low back pain A specified low back pain presentation indexed to this code
M54.6 Pain in thoracic spine Pain identified in the thoracic spine
M54.2 Cervicalgia Neck pain indexed to cervicalgia
M54.12 Radiculopathy, cervical region Documented cervical radiculopathy
M54.14 Radiculopathy, thoracic region Documented thoracic radiculopathy
M54.16 Radiculopathy, lumbar region Documented lumbar radiculopathy
M54.17 Radiculopathy, lumbosacral region Documented lumbosacral radiculopathy
These are complete diagnosis codes. That does not make every service billed with them payable. Coverage, medical necessity, and reporting instructions still apply. M54.5 is a parent subcategory, not a complete claim code. Select the appropriate child code. The same distinction applies to broad references such as M54.3, M54.4, M51.x, M47.x, G89.x, and S33.x. The “x” in those family references is shorthand, not a character to copy onto a claim. See the official ICD-10-CM resources.  

Choosing Among the Low Back Pain Codes

M54.50: Low Back Pain, Unspecified

“Lower back pain” is generally inclusive of Lumbar pain, and though not “officially” suggested in ICD-10-PCS, can be found using the Alphabetic Index. The code does not require an unrestricted MRI, or a negative MRI, as a supporting basis for assigning the code. Similarly, it does not require a pain score, or an explanation that all potential causes of the patient’s pain have been ruled out. The code must represent the supported diagnosis. Pain on the right vs pain on the left does not provide a different code, and must not be captured as an unsupported code.

M54.51: Vertebrogenic Low Back Pain

This code describes pain that is caused by a disease or condition of a vertebral element of the spine that is located in the low back. This code is not inclusive of pain that is primarily on the left side of the body, and is not inclusive of pain that is primarily on the right side of the body. This code is not inclusive of pain of the spinal column. The clinician’s diagnosis is critical. An imaging report that mentions endplate changes should not be the basis for a vertebrogenic diagnosis in the billing workflow. Separate the assignment of code from the coverage of the procedure. A payer’s policy for Basivertebral Nerve Blation, for example, may require specific MRI findings, clinical criteria, and documentation of treatment response. An M54.51 code on the claim does not mean the other policy components are satisfied. For instance, the Basivertebral Nerve Blation Policy of BCBSND requires that either the payer or provider document the treatment response.

M54.59: Other Low Back Pain

M54.59 is used to denote other low back pain. To check other possible diagnoses for the report, use the Tabular List and/or the Alphabetic Index. Using “other” does not clarify an ambiguous diagnosis. M54.59 does not denote right-sided pain, severe pain, chronic pain, etc. on its own. A diagnosed ligament or muscle sprain/ strain is evaluated based on the appropriate Injury code.

Thoracic, Cervical, and Sacrococcygeal Pain

M54.6 refers to symptoms pertaining to pain in the thoracic spine. Upper or middle back symptoms must include adequate anatomical detail to distinguish thoracic pain from, for example, pain in the neck, shoulder, rib, etc. M54.2 describes cervicalgia. Avoid assigning this code merely because the patient points to a location near the shoulders. Follow the documented condition and the Index entry that matches it. Documented tailbone pain can lead to code assignment of M53.3, sacrococcygeal disorders, NOS, if the documented diagnosis and Index support that assignment. This code is outside the scope of M54. A patient can have pain in more than one region which is assessed separately. Code the conditions when there is support to do so, but avoid coding several regional conditions to describe one condition that is documented vaguely.

Sciatica, Lumbago With Sciatica, and Radiculopathy

Leg radiation is useful clinical information, but it does not authorize the coder to diagnose sciatica or radiculopathy. Use the provider’s documented assessment and applicable indexing instructions.

Sciatica Codes and Laterality

Documented condition Unspecified side Right side Left side
Sciatica M54.30 M54.31 M54.32
Lumbago with sciatica M54.40 M54.41 M54.42
M54.3 and M54.4 are parent subcategories. Their complete codes distinguish sciatica from low back pain with sciatica and identify the affected side. For documented lumbago with right-sided sciatica, consider M54.41 rather than assembling M54.50 and M54.31 for the same presentation. Check for an underlying condition that directs coding elsewhere. Neither family has a bilateral code. When bilateral involvement is documented and these families apply, report the right and left codes under the general laterality guideline. Do not use “unspecified side” to stand for bilateral disease.

Radiculopathy Deserves Its Own Coding Distinction

M54.16 lumbar radiculopathy and M54.17 lumbosacral radiculopathy are the only codes currently available and do not have right or left subdivisions. A positive exam finding or a patient report of tingling does not support a diagnosis of radiculopathy. Likewise, pain that is described as radiating should not be presumed to be a nerve root disorder. When disc disorder or spondylosis with radiculopathy is the clinical diagnosis, and it is determined that the nerve is involved, it may be appropriate to assign a combination code. This combination code captures the nerve involvement and the condition, making an additional M54 code for radiculopathy inappropriate.

Chronic Back Pain and G89 Coding

There is no single code that fits every chronic back pain encounter. Location, cause, pain classification, and the purpose of care all affect the answer.
Code Description Main distinction
G89.29 Other chronic pain Chronic pain without a more specific applicable G89 classification
G89.21 Chronic pain due to trauma The documented pain is related to trauma
G89.28 Other chronic postprocedural pain The documented pain has a postprocedural relationship
G89.4 Chronic pain syndrome The provider specifically diagnoses this syndrome

Chronic pain and chronic pain syndrome are not synonyms. G89. 4 should only be reported when specifically documented in the clinical record as chronic pain syndrome; alone, severe pain, mood changes or impaired daily function do not support that code. Coders should not conclude that the pain is chronic based on the symptom history but instead rely on information from the provider who describes it as such. If G89 is appropriate, it may report with a site-specific pain code because both codes provide relevant information and coding guidelines allow both. Chronic Care Management Solutions give practices a framework to ensure the documentation and coding process remains reproducible.

Sequencing Follows the Purpose of the Encounter

Use this distinction: For control or management of pain: The stated purpose code (G89) can be first-listed, with the underlying cause or site of pain reported as applicable. For evaluation of a pain site without a confirmed cause: The first-listed code is for the pain site, and the G89 code is provided as additional information. For treatment directed to a condition for which pain is a symptom: Report the condition. Do not routinely assign a code from the injury and poisoning classification (G89) when pain is present. For example, documented chronic low back pain without an established cause may support M54.50 and G89.29. Their order may depend on the reason for the encounter. An encounter for surgery to address a documented spinal disorder would support a code for the spinal disorder. A chronic pain code would not be an automatic addition to the claim. The same would apply to documented severe pain in the absence of an established cause for care. Refer to the official coding guidelines.

Disc Disorders, Spondylosis, and Other Diagnosed Causes

A confirmed diagnosis is going to explain your back pain much better than an M54 symptom code. Symptoms related to a diagnosed condition are usually not reported separately, unless the classification directs otherwise. This doesn’t mean that every single abnormal finding is going to replace a symptom code. The report of the diagnosis must be reported along with its reason for reporting. In an office visit, avoid assigning an incidental imaging finding as the cause of pain, unless there is an adequate supported assessment.

M51 Codes for Disc Disorders

Code Description
M51.26 Other intervertebral disc displacement, lumbar region
M51.27 Other intervertebral disc displacement, lumbosacral region
M51.16 Intervertebral disc disorders with radiculopathy, lumbar region
M51.17 Intervertebral disc disorders with radiculopathy, lumbosacral region
Disc displacement and disc degeneration are different classifications. The presence of a bulge, degeneration, or nerve symptoms should not be treated as one interchangeable diagnosis. Lumbar disc degeneration under M51.36 requires additional detail:
  • M51.360: Discogenic back pain only.
  • M51.361: Lower extremity pain only.
  • M51.362: Discogenic back pain and lower extremity pain.
  • M51.369: Without mention of lumbar back pain or lower extremity pain.
These are shortened descriptions of other intervertebral disc degeneration in the lumbar region. Select the documented pain relationship rather than assuming that every pain complaint is caused by degeneration. M51.37 provides corresponding options for the lumbosacral region.

M47 Codes for Spondylosis

M47.816 indicates lumbar spondylosis with absent myelopathy and radiculopathy. M47.817 describes the corresponding condition in the lumbosacral region. If lumbar spondylosis with radiculopathy is documented, M47.26 may be applied. Do not automatically assign M54.16 and/or duplicate the radiculopathy. Radiculopathy and myelopathy are not interchangeable terms. The clinical assessment should support the type of neurological condition being coded, and a coding tool cannot make this determination. Other causes need to be coded separately. Distinction between lumbar spinal stenosis and neurogenic claudication needs to be made. Neurogenic claudication is codable with M48.062, whereas lumbar spinal stenosis without neurogenic claudication is M48.061. Scoliosis, vertebral fractures and osteoporotic fractures need to be coded appropriately rather than using a shortcut code of “back pain.”

Back Injuries: S33 Sprains and S39 Strains

S33 describes sprains and dislocations involving joints and ligaments of the lumbar spine and pelvic region. It is not the generic code family to be used for every painful injury of the back. For documented sprains of ligaments of the lumbar spine, complete codes are S33.5XXA, S33.5XXD, and S33.5XXS. The X characters are required placeholders. Sprain of the lumbar spine is differentiated from strain by the documentation of injury. A lower back muscle or tendon strain is coded as S39.012A, S39.012D, or S39.012S, supported by the documentation. Sprain and strain must not be interchanged. The seventh character describes the phase of care:
  • A: Active treatment of the injury.
  • D: Routine care during healing or recovery.
  • S: Residual effect of the injury, or sequela.
When used for sequela, the residual condition of injury is coded first, followed by the injury code, and the seventh character, S. The presence of back pain related to a heavy lift is not sufficient to classify the injury as a strain. Sprains and strains are classified by the documentation of injury.

Excludes1 and Excludes2 Notes That Affect Back Pain Claims

Read instructions at the code, subcategory, category, and chapter levels. A note attached to a parent applies to its child codes even if an EHR search result does not display it.

Excludes1: Check Whether the Conditions Can Be Reported Together

An Excludes1 note generally prohibits using the excluded code with the code above the note. There is an exception for clearly unrelated conditions. Query the provider when the relationship is unclear. Selected relevant notes include:
Location of note Excluded condition or code family
M54 Psychogenic dorsalgia, F45.41
M54.5 Low back strain, S39.012; lumbago with sciatica, M54.4; lumbago due to disc displacement, M51.2
M54.5 Lumbar or lumbosacral disc degeneration with discogenic back pain only, M51.360 or M51.370
M54.4 Disc degeneration with discogenic back pain and lower extremity pain, M51.362 or M51.372; lumbago with sciatica due to a disc disorder, M51.1
M54.1 Radiculopathy with cervical disc disorder, M50.1; other disc disorder, M51.1; or spondylosis, M47.2
This distinction matters: the M54.5 exclusion identifies the discogenic-back-pain-only codes, while M54.4 identifies the combined back-and-leg-pain codes. Avoid replacing the actual instructions with a blanket rule that every M54 code conflicts with every M51 code. M54.2 also excludes cervicalgia due to a cervical disc disorder. M54.6 excludes thoracic spine pain due to an intervertebral disc disorder. This table is selective, so verify the complete entry in the official Tabular List.

Excludes2: Both Conditions Are Present, Report As Necessary

Excludes2 specifies that the excluded condition does not fall within the code but can be found in the patient and may be reported as appropriate. For instance, G89 has Excludes2 notes for localized pain such as back pain or lumbar pain. This allows for the reporting of both conditions and a suitable G89 and site-specific pain when the ICD guidelines support it and is not requiring G89 for all back pain cases. S33 also has an Excludes2 note for lower back and pelvic muscle strain. Distinct, documented, ligament and muscle injuries need to be reported and assessed individually rather than automatic exclusion.

When M54.9 Is the Wrong Choice

M54.9 should not be used as a default code when documentation points to:
  • A region-specific pain support code (regional pain code).
  • A different classification for sciatica or radiculopathy.
  • A confirmed etiology in which pain is part of the condition.
  • A documented injury for which an injury code is required.
  • A pregnancy-related condition for which the coding guidance for obstetrics and gynecology applies.

For instance, in outpatient coding “possible disc herniation” or “suspected radiculopathy” are not known diagnoses. Code documented symptoms or other known conditions per outpatient coding rules. Inpatient uncertain-diagnosis guidelines work differently. For obstetric–specific problems associated with the pregnancy, review how the problem is related to the pregnancy and use different types of obstetric coding guidance. OB/GYN Billing Services can verify the appropriate sequence of codes rather than using M54. 9.

Documentation That Makes Code Selection Clearer

A note that explains the condition being evaluated and the rationale for the developed plan is useful. You can provide additional detail, but it isn’t always useful. Things to include when documenting:
  • Location: Lumbar, thoracic, cervical, sacral, etc.
  • Assessment: Symptom diagnosis, confirmed condition, or undiagnosed possible condition.
  • Classification: Of pain as acute, chronic, post-procedure, traumatic, etc.
  • Radiation and Side: If pain is extending into an extremity, which side is affected?
  • Clinical Findings: Relevant physical findings including neurologic findings and functional limitations.
  • Diagnostic Relationships: If a disorder of the spine, injury, etc. explains the symptoms.
  • Purpose of Visit: For an evaluation, to treat the condition, to manage the pain.
  • Service justification: Why the service is appropriate.
  • Use Imaging, Assessment, Clinical findings: Together. If there is conflicting information, clarification is necessary, not guessing based on which is the most specific.
  • Neutral example: The assessment describes back pain. The examination describes tenderness in the lumbar area. What is the location of the area that is causing pain? Document any supported diagnosis or state if it is undetermined.
Do not recommend a diagnosis based on a payer’s list of covered codes, just because it is there.

Practical Coding Scenarios

These are examples showing possible coding decisions. These are not patient records, audited cases, or guarantees of payment.

Unt documented Region of Back Pain

“Back pain” is documented in the assessment; however, no region is identified, nor is a cause established. M54.9 may apply, but the coder should not assume lumbar back pain based on the practice treating a lot of patients with lower back pain.

Right Sided Low Back Pain without Sciatica

The assessment shows only “low back pain” with no other details. M54.50 may apply. The absence of sciatica does not rule out a muscle strain. Also, the documentation of the side, right, does not rule in a right-sided muscle strain and therefore, does not apply M54.59.

Left Sided Sciatica and Lumbar Back Pain

The assessment shows lumbar back pain with left-side sciatica. There is nothing else in the documentation to justify coding elsewhere. M54.42 is appropriate in this case. A separate code for unspecified lumbar back pain is not warranted, as it does not provide any additional diagnostic information.

Lumbar Disc Disorder With Radiculopathy

A lumbar disc disorder with radiculopathy has been diagnosed. M51.16 covers the combination. It is incorrect to add M54.16 for the radiculopathy, as it would conflict with the relevant exclusion and duplicates the neurological part.

Pain Management Without an Established Cause

When it is a visit specifically for chronic low back pain and that there documentation of an underlying cause G89. First is the 29, or M54. 50 augmented to identify the site of pain when tolerated. On the other hand, a different way to sequence an evaluation for back-pain complaint may be warranted. Pain Management Billing Services can ensure the formulated diagnosis order matches the providers documentation and also the purpose of the visit.

Lumbar Ligament Sprain Receiving Active Treatment

A lumbar ligament sprain has been diagnosed. Active treatment is provided. S33.5XXA may apply. As to the practice’s registration label of “new” or “established” patient, it does not define the injury’s seventh character.

Billing Checks That Address the Actual Denial Risk

A complete diagnosis code, a supported diagnosis, and a covered service are separate requirements. Meeting one of the requirements does not necessarily meet the others. Documentation of a regional pain diagnosis may capture the evaluation accurately, but may not provide sufficient supporting documentation to justify the service for the particular intervention under the applicable policy. Payers have requirements for clinical findings, functionality, treatment responses, and supporting documentation. For Medicare, examine applicable national and local coverage policies and the associated billing instructions. Diagnosis codes should not be used as an automatic CPT pairing tool. Office visits and spinal interventions, for example, are distinct services with independent CPT requirements. A diagnosis does not define the level of an office visit, or guarantee coverage for an injection. As with the other types of modifiers, procedure modifiers cannot address a conflict between a diagnosis and the chart. Break out service, side, anatomical region, units and diagnostic pointers as separate claim elements.

A Useful Approach to Challenges and Objections

Depending on the payer, the following circumstances may apply:
  • Incomplete code: There could be a missing parent category or placeholder, or a required seventh character could be missing.
  • Documentation mismatch: Compare the signed assessment to the diagnosis submitted to determine if documentation does not match and resolve any conflicts.
  • Medical necessity: There could be a service-specific policy criterion at issue. A more specific code may not resolve it.
  • Authorization or benefits: Consider an administrative issue rather than changing a supported diagnosis.
  • Appeal or correction: Use the appropriate payer process and provide support to address the problem stated.
There are a variety of causes of a denial that can be differentiated and prioritized. If every denial is considered a “coding” problem, the team is likely to change diagnosis codes repeatedly when in fact the reason for the denial may be due to a lack of authorization or unsupported procedure documentation.

Most Common Mistakes to Remove from the Workflow

  • Treating M54.51 and M54.59 as left and right low back pain codes.
  • Submitting parent references as complete claim codes, i.e. M54.3, M54.4 or S33.5.
  • Radiculopathy diagnosed based on radiation or tingling alone, or an examination finding in the absence of other diagnostic data.
  • Chronic pain syndrome assigned in the absence of other diagnostic data supporting a diagnosis.
  • Routinely adding symptom codes along with a diagnosis, to determine if the symptoms are related to the condition for which the diagnosis was made.
  • Applying a payer’s definition of a procedure to determine the definition of an ICD-10-CM code.
  • Routinely replacing a defensible unspecified code to match a covered code list.
Develop code-selection prompts based on the most important missing question, i.e. “Which area is involved?” and “is a nerve condition diagnosed?” are better than “pick a more payable code.”

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the ICD-10-CM code for unspecified back pain?

M54.9 is dorsalgia, unspecified. It applies when back pain is documented without a more specific location or diagnosis. Use a regional or condition-specific code when the record supports it.

What is the difference between M54.9 and M54.50?

M54.9 leaves the back region unspecified. M54.50 identifies low back pain but leaves its type unspecified. Documented lower back pain generally supports evaluating M54.50 rather than defaulting to M54.9.

Are M54.51 and M54.59 right-sided or left-sided codes?

No. M54.51 means vertebrogenic low back pain, and M54.59 means other low back pain. Neither identifies a side. Sciatica and lumbago-with-sciatica codes provide laterality options when those diagnoses are documented.

What code is used for chronic back pain?

The answer depends on the documented site, cause, and encounter purpose. A site-specific pain code with G89.29 may be appropriate under the pain guidelines. G89.4 requires a specific diagnosis of chronic pain syndrome.

What is the code for low back pain with sciatica?

M54.41 identifies right-sided lumbago with sciatica, M54.42 identifies left-sided involvement, and M54.40 identifies an unspecified side. An underlying disc disorder may direct coding to a different family.

Can M54.9 be used for upper back pain?

When the documentation identifies thoracic spine pain, evaluate M54.6. Neck pain may support M54.2. M54.9 is appropriate when the available documentation and Index do not support a more specific back pain classification.

Is M54.9 billable, and does it guarantee payment?

M54.9 is a complete ICD-10-CM diagnosis code that can be reported when supported. Payment depends on the service, medical necessity, coverage, authorization, and other claim requirements. Code completeness does not guarantee reimbursement.

Put the Documentation and the Claim on the Same Page

Correct coding for back pain begins with a well-defined assessment: what site, current diagnosis, and nature of care. Using those details you can choose code and validate instruction coverage independently

For all the back pain claims that are leading to repeat rework, talk to Resilient MBS about support with coding review, any queries around documentation and denial follow up. A targeted analysis can spotlight where note, claim, and payer requirements are mismatched.

Sources

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Get in Touch

One More Step To Continue

Get Free Consultaion

EXCELLENT
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5
Based on 15 reviews
Posted on Google Google
Bonnie Russo profile picture
Bonnie Russo
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google.
Resilient Medical Billing Services has been our absolute saving grace—true knights in shining armor! We came from a well-known billing company that left us drowning—five months in and still no credentialing completed, we were overwhelmed, losing money, and even paying money back. It was a nightmare. Then we found Resilient. From day one, their team took charge with professionalism, clarity, and genuine care. They not only cleaned up the mess we were left with, but completed all our new credentialing in record time. Their communication is phenomenal—they’re responsive, proactive, and always available when we need them. Since working with Resilient, we’ve seen a real shift—not just in profit, but in peace of mind. We feel seen, heard, and fully supported. Choosing them has been one of the best decisions we’ve made for our business. Highly, highly recommend! Bonnie Russo, LCSW Owner/Operator Papillon Health and Wellness Psychotherapy
Posted on Google Google
Jartu Garway profile picture
Jartu Garway
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google.
I can’t recommend Resilient Medical Billing Services enough! They truly made the process of getting credentialed with Medicaid and some of the top insurance companies in the state fast and smooth. From start to finish, they stayed on top of everything, ensuring there were no delays. Their communication was consistent, keeping me informed throughout the entire process. What sets them apart is their dedication to seeing you succeed. They are incredibly respectful, patient, and thorough when requesting information, always double-checking to ensure everything is correct and in place for approval. Their attention to detail helped eliminate any potential roadblocks during the credentialing process. Another major plus is their pricing structure- there's a one-time charge with no hidden fees,and they do exactly what they say. No Surprises, no fine print,Just reliable Services. I will be recommending them for the rest of my career—this team knows how to get the job done right and efficiently! MIKE WOOD IS THE BEST I HONESTLY FEEL LIKE HE IS FAMILY INSTEAD OF A BUSINESS AFFILIATION!!!!
Posted on Google Google
lashelle melton profile picture
lashelle melton
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google.
Positive Review for Resilient Credentialing and Billing Company I am thrilled to share my experience with Resilient Credentialing and Billing Company, having partnered with them since May 2024 for Melton Telepsychiatry Services. From the very beginning, their professionalism and dedication to our clinic's needs have been evident. The team at Resilient has made the credentialing process seamless and efficient. They possess a deep understanding of the nuances in our industry, which has significantly alleviated the stress typically associated with credentialing and billing. Their prompt communication and willingness to address any questions have provided us with peace of mind, allowing us to focus more on our patients. Additionally, their billing services are exemplary. They have streamlined our billing processes, ensuring timely reimbursements and maintaining an accurate account of our services. This has had a positive impact on our cash flow and overall operational efficiency. Overall, I highly recommend Resilient for any clinic looking for reliable, knowledgeable, and supportive credentialing and billing services. Their commitment to client success truly sets them apart in the industry. Thank you, Resilient, for your outstanding service! Dr. LaShelle Melton DNP, APRN, PMHNP-BC, CCHP
Posted on Google Google
Bakary Marong profile picture
Bakary Marong
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google.
Hello Mike Thank you for your credentialing service and I truly appreciate you especially your commitment, respect and professionalism you have shown me during the entire process. I will highly recommend you to anyone who is interested in credentialing services. Mike, it was truly amazing to work with you. Thank you for helping me get credentialed with both Medicare and private insurances. Bakary Marong
Posted on Google Google
Ivanka Acosta profile picture
Ivanka Acosta
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google.
Resilient MBS is the best for all your medical billing service needs! Being a new business owner, I was looking for a company that could help me become in network with certain medical and vision plans. Not only did resilient MBS do that, but they also answered any questions I had about the process and what to expect. The credentialing specialist Mike was great. He was always quick to respond to my emails and would send me frequent updates. I truly recommend Resilient MBS.
Posted on Google Google
Cynthia Madueke profile picture
Cynthia Madueke
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google.
I have had a highly positive experience working with the team, particularly Mike. They have provided clear and helpful guidance throughout the credentialing process, addressing all my questions and concerns. I am also looking forward to continuing our collaboration on billing services. The team's expertise and support have been invaluable, and I appreciate their dedication to ensuring a smooth and successful experience.
Posted on Google Google
Kristin Tomczak profile picture
Kristin Tomczak
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google.
Working with Mike Wood through Resilient BBS LLC is making the credentialing process as smooth as possible! Mike has been communicative about the process each step of the way and is readily available whenever I have a question and/or need clarification.
Posted on Google Google
ReklayMe Health and Wellness profile picture
ReklayMe Health and Wellness
Google star 1Google star 2Google star 3Google star 4Google star 5Trustindex verifies that the original source of the review is Google.
They have been very helpful and very patient throughout my credentialing process. It is a great company to work with!
Verified by Trustindex
Trustindex verified badge is the Universal Symbol of Trust. Only the greatest companies can get the verified badge who has a review score above 4.5, based on customer reviews over the past 12 months. Read more

One More Step To View Pricing