Modifier 76
Repeat procedure or service by the same physician
Use it when
- The same procedure performed again the same day by the same physician
- A repeat radiograph to assess change or confirm placement
- A repeat procedure necessitated by a change in the patient's condition
Do not use it when
- The repeat was performed by a different physician, which takes modifier 77
- A repeat clinical diagnostic laboratory test, which takes modifier 91
- Resubmitting a claim that was not paid, which needs a corrected claim not a modifier
A worked example
A chest radiograph is performed in the morning. The patient's condition changes and a second radiograph is performed the same afternoon by the same physician.
Both studies were genuinely performed and both are billable. Without modifier 76 on the second, it adjudicates as an exact duplicate of the first and returns CO-18.
The report for each study has to stand on its own, with its own indication and findings. Two claims supported by one report is not a repeat procedure.
What decides it
CO-18 duplicate denials divide into two causes with opposite fixes. One is a workflow problem — resubmitting instead of checking claim status. The other is this: a genuine repeat missing the modifier that distinguishes it.
The reason for the repeat should be documented, because a repeat performed without a clinical reason is not separately billable however genuinely it occurred. A study repeated because the first was technically inadequate is generally not separately payable.
Using a generic distinct-service modifier where a specific repeat modifier exists is weaker on review. Modifier 76 states what happened; modifier 59 merely asserts the services were distinct.
Denial codes this affects
Modifiers often confused with this one
Terms used here — Modifier · Rejection · Claim Scrubbing
How we handle it — Claims Management · Denial Management · Medical Coding
Every CPT and HCPCS modifier with a guide
Coverage attestation
Evaluation and management
Global period
Multiple and bilateral
Repeat
- 76Repeat Procedure, Same Physician
- 91Repeat Clinical Diagnostic Lab Test
- 77Repeat Procedure, Another Physician
Primary sources
What the payers and code-set maintainers actually publish about modifier 76.
- NCCI Policy Manual for Medicare Services (opens in a new tab)
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services — The reasoning behind the edits, chapter by chapter. Where the edit files tell you two codes conflict, this explains why — which is what an appeal has to address.
- Medically Unlikely Edits (MUE) tables (opens in a new tab)
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services — The maximum units of a code payable for one patient on one day. Unit-based denials usually trace to this table rather than to a coding error.
- CPT code set (opens in a new tab)
American Medical Association — Maintainer of CPT. Annual changes to CPT are the most common cause of a sudden, unexplained rise in denials each January.
Questions about modifier 76
When the same physician repeats the same procedure on the same day and both are genuinely billable. Without it, the second claim adjudicates as an exact duplicate and returns CO-18.
Modifier 76 is a repeat by the same physician; modifier 77 is a repeat by a different physician. Both distinguish a genuine repeat from a duplicate claim, and using the wrong one misstates who performed the service.
Generally not. A study repeated for technical inadequacy is not separately payable. The repeat needs a clinical reason — a change in condition, or a need to assess response — and the reason should be documented.
It may clear the edit, but it is weaker on review. Modifier 76 states what happened; modifier 59 only asserts that the services were distinct. Use the specific modifier where one exists.
Find out what your denials are costing you
A free billing audit reviews your denial rate, AR aging and clean claim rate against industry benchmarks. Takes about two minutes to request. No sales pitch.
No setup fees · You pay when we collect · Pricing from 3% of net collections