Methodology and sources

The Staffing Analysis pre-fills every productivity, wage and staffing input with a reference value so you have a reasonable starting point. These references are starting points, not standards or guarantees. Your own measured numbers are always better — replace any value in the tool and the results update.

Productive time

Productive hours per FTE per year = (paid hours − PTO and holiday hours) × (1 − non-production time). With the defaults: (2,080 − 200) × 88% = 1,654.4 hours.

Assumption	Default	Grade	Basis
Annual paid hours	2,080	B (Published standard or survey)	A standard full-time year: 40 hours × 52 weeks.
PTO + holiday hours	200	D (BW Interests estimate)	BW Interests estimate of paid time off plus holidays for a full-time employee (25 days).
Non-production time	12%	D (BW Interests estimate)	BW Interests estimate of time spent on meetings, education, queries and system downtime. AHIMA and ACDIS sources both name non-coding duties as a major driver of productivity. [S1] [S12]
Staffing buffer	5%	D (BW Interests estimate)	BW Interests estimate of extra coverage for turnover and open positions.

Coding productivity references (charts per productive hour)

Required FTE = monthly volume ÷ (rate × productive hours per month), plus the staffing buffer. Figures quoted per 8-hour day were converted by dividing by 8. AAPC does not publish official productivity standards; figures from AAPC community forums are labeled community-reported. Most published coding benchmarks predate ICD-10 (October 2015); the inpatient reference uses the post-ICD-10 re-measurement.

Work type	Reference	Range	Grade	Year(s)	What the sources show
Inpatient (DRG) Facility	1.6	1.3–3	A (Published study) / B (Published standard or survey)	2016; 2020 (2007 historical)	Post-ICD-10 AHIMA-cited studies found about 38–42 minutes per inpatient record (roughly 1.4–1.6 per hour) across more than 150,000 records, with time rising as case mix rose. One hospital's 2020 contract expectation of 13 per day works out to about 1.6 per hour. The pre-ICD-10 2007 benchmark of about 3 per hour is shown only as a historical upper bound. [S1] [S2] [S3]
Observation Facility	3	2.25–5	B (Published standard or survey) / C (Community-reported)	2020; undated	One hospital's 2020 expectation of 18 per day is about 2.25 per hour; practitioners report hospital standards near 5 per hour. [S2] [S6]
Outpatient surgery / hospital-based ASC Facility	4.5	3.75–7	B (Published standard or survey) / C (Community-reported)	2020; undated	One hospital's 2020 same-day surgery expectation of 30 per day is about 3.75 per hour; industry summaries cite 6–7 per hour and practitioners report up to 8. [S2] [S4] [S6]
Emergency department – facility Facility	8	6–11	B (Published standard or survey) / C (Community-reported)	undated; 2026	Industry summaries cite 8–11 ED facility charts per hour; a 2026 hospital job posting states 10 per hour. [S4] [S7]
Interventional (IR, cardiac cath, GI/endoscopy) Facility	4	3–6	D (BW Interests estimate)	—	BW Interests estimate — no published benchmark found.
Hospital outpatient clinic visits Facility	8	5.6–20	B (Published standard or survey) / C (Community-reported)	2020; undated	One hospital's 2020 expectation of 45 clinic charts per day (diagnoses plus CPT/E&M) is about 5.6 per hour, or about 9.4 per hour for diagnosis-only coding; practitioners report up to 20 per hour. [S2] [S6]
Ancillary / recurring (lab, radiology, therapy series) Facility	25	17–43	B (Published standard or survey) / C (Community-reported)	1996; undated	A 1996 HIM survey reported 140–344 ER/outpatient tests per day (about 17–43 per hour); practitioners describe about one minute per lab or x-ray encounter. Older data. [S5] [S6]
ED facility + professional (combined) Facility	7	5–9	C (Community-reported)	undated	A multi-hospital ED coding team reported 5–9 charts per hour for coders working both facility and professional sides, depending on experience. [S11]
E/M – primary care / office Professional fee	12	12–20	B (Published standard or survey) / C (Community-reported)	2005; undated	A 2005 survey of 250 coders found a median of 12 per hour in medical practices; practitioners report 12–20 per hour. [S8] [S6]
E/M – specialty office Professional fee	10	7–20	C (Community-reported) / D (BW Interests estimate)	undated	Practitioners report 150–200 charts per day for family practice and specialties; specialty-specific values are BW Interests estimates until better data exists. [S9]
Surgical / operative reports Professional fee	7	4–8	B (Published standard or survey) / C (Community-reported)	2005; undated	A 2005 survey found a median of 7 per hour in surgical practices; practitioners report hospital surgery standards near 8 per hour. [S8] [S6]
Hospitalist / inpatient professional Professional fee	12	10–20	D (BW Interests estimate)	—	BW Interests estimate based on E/M ranges — no published benchmark found.
Emergency department – professional Professional fee	20	15–31	C (Community-reported)	undated	Practitioners report 150–250 ED professional charts per day. [S10]
Radiology – professional Professional fee	50	30–60	C (Community-reported)	undated	Practitioners report 400 or more radiology charts per day. [S9]
Anesthesia Professional fee	15	10–25	D (BW Interests estimate)	—	BW Interests estimate — no published benchmark found; the literature notes anesthesia is difficult to benchmark. [S8]
Pathology Professional fee	35	25–60	D (BW Interests estimate)	—	BW Interests estimate — no published benchmark found.

Specialty E/M rows

Each specialty office E/M row starts at its own reference. BW Interests estimate until specialty-specific data exists.

Cardiology: 10/hr (range 7–20; grade D (BW Interests estimate))
Orthopedics: 10/hr (range 7–20; grade D (BW Interests estimate))
Oncology: 10/hr (range 7–20; grade D (BW Interests estimate))
Gastroenterology (GI): 10/hr (range 7–20; grade D (BW Interests estimate))
Neurology: 10/hr (range 7–20; grade D (BW Interests estimate))
OB/GYN: 10/hr (range 7–20; grade D (BW Interests estimate))
Urology: 10/hr (range 7–20; grade D (BW Interests estimate))
Behavioral health: 10/hr (range 7–20; grade D (BW Interests estimate))
Other specialty: 10/hr (range 7–20; grade D (BW Interests estimate))

Audit / QA

Audit FTE = (monthly volume × audit %) ÷ (audits per hour × productive hours per month), plus the buffer.

Audit % of volume: reference 5% (range 2%–10%; grade D (BW Interests estimate)). No published standard exists. Organizations commonly audit a fixed sample per coder each quarter or a set percentage of volume; 5% is a typical starting point.
Inpatient (DRG) audit throughput: 2 audits/hour (range 1.5–2.5; grade B (Published standard or survey)). One hospital's published audit expectation is about 2 charts per hour; complex inpatient charts can take longer. [S2]
All other work types: coding reference × 0.6 (range 0.5–1.0×; grade C (Community-reported)). Practitioners report roughly 90 outpatient audits in an 8-hour day (about 11 an hour) against outpatient coding standards near 20 an hour. [S6]

CDI (inpatient concurrent)

Workload method (used for the gap): reviews per year = in-scope discharges × (1 + follow-up reviews per case). FTE = reviews per year ÷ (reviews per productive day × productive days per FTE), where productive days = productive hours ÷ 8.

Reviews per productive day: reference 25 (range 16–35; grade B (Published standard or survey)). ACDIS members report roughly 8–12 new reviews and 12–20 re-reviews a day; totals of 16–35 are common depending on experience and program focus. [S12] [S13]
Follow-up reviews per case: reference 1.5 (range 1–2.5; grade B (Published standard or survey) / C (Community-reported)). Average number of follow-up reviews per case after the initial review. [S13]
Ratio method (cross-check): 1 CDI FTE per 1,500 in-scope annual discharges (range 1,500–1,600; grade B (Published standard or survey) / C (Community-reported)). A common cross-check of one CDI specialist per 1,500–1,600 in-scope annual discharges. [S13] [S14]

Scope matters: a program that reviews all payers covers every discharge; a Medicare-only program covers roughly 40%.

Wages and cost

Fully loaded annual cost per FTE = hourly wage × annual paid hours × (1 + benefits load). Cost per coded chart = fully loaded hourly cost ÷ (rate × productive share of paid hours). No BW Interests pricing or savings figures are used anywhere in the tool.

Role	Reference	Range	Grade	Basis
Coder – inpatient / hospital	$28.42/hr	$17.79–$39.01	A (Published study)	BLS median for medical records specialists in hospitals (≈ $59,120/yr); national 10th–90th percentile $37,000–$81,150. Payscale's self-reported inpatient coder pay runs lower ($16.58–$28.59/hr). [S15] [S16]
Coder – outpatient / pro fee	$24.59/hr	$17.79–$39.01	A (Published study)	BLS national median for medical records specialists (≈ $51,140/yr); physician-office median ≈ $47,120 (≈ $22.65/hr). [S15]
Coding auditor	$33.79/hr	$25.48–$43.75	C (Community-reported)	Payscale's self-reported average for medical coding auditors (≈ $70,275/yr), range $53,000–$91,000. [S17]
CDI specialist	$48.08/hr	$43.27–$52.88	B (Published standard or survey)	The most common salary bands in the ACDIS 2025 survey were $90,000–$109,999 (≈ $100,000/yr). [S18]
Benefits load	32%	30%–44%	A (Published study)	In health care and social assistance, employers pay about $15.42/hr in benefits on $35.26/hr of wages, of which $4.24 is paid leave. Because this model already pays wages for all 2,080 hours (leave included), paid leave is left out: ($15.42 − $4.24) ÷ $35.26 ≈ 32%. Including paid leave the load would be about 44%. [S19]

Status ratings

Balanced: the gap is within ±0.25 FTE or ±5% of required (whichever is larger), with no growing backlog.
Short – watch: a shortage of up to 10% of required, or a backlog of more than 5 days.
Short – act: a shortage of more than 10% of required, a growing backlog, or a backlog of more than 15 days.
Over-staffed: capacity more than 10% above required with no backlog — which may support growth, backlog work or other duties.

A rate you enter is flagged when it is more than 25% above the high end or below the low end of the published range. The note is informational only.

Why productivity varies

EHR platform. Coding workflows, chart navigation and encoder integration differ between Epic, Oracle Health, Meditech and others.
Computer-assisted coding. CAC can speed simpler charts, but validation still takes time, and the benefit depends on setup and documentation.
Documentation quality. Incomplete or unclear notes mean more provider queries, holds and rework.
Case mix and acuity. Inpatient coding time rises with case mix index; complex specialties take longer.
Coder experience. New coders and coders new to a specialty work more slowly while they learn.
Query and non-coding duties. Queries, education, meetings and downtime come out of productive time.
Work queue design. Batching, routing and how charts reach coders change throughput.

Because of all this, the references are starting points. A coding time study gives an organization its own baseline.

Sources

[S1] AHIMA coding productivity studies after ICD-10, summarized. ICD10monitor (summarizing AHIMA), 2016. Link
What it measured: Average minutes to code an inpatient record before and after the ICD-10 transition, across more than 150,000 records; coding time rose as case mix index rose. Limitations: Secondary summary of association studies; inpatient only; organizations and workflows in the sample are not described in detail.
[S2] RFP P427-20 Medical Coders and Auditors, Q&A amendment. University of New Mexico Hospital, 2020. Link
What it measured: Daily productivity expectations one academic hospital published for contracted coders and auditors, by chart type. Limitations: One organization's expectations, not a multi-site study; reflects its EHR, case mix and workflow.
[S3] Coding Benchmark Survey (e-HIM Coding Benchmark Workgroup). Journal of AHIMA, 2007. Pre-ICD-10 — historical Link
What it measured: Survey-based coding benchmarks by setting under ICD-9-CM. Limitations: Pre-ICD-10 (before October 2015); shown only as a historical upper bound.
[S4] Medical coding productivity by setting (industry summary). TextExpander blog, citing AHIMA, undated. Link
What it measured: Commonly quoted charts-per-hour ranges by coding setting. Limitations: Vendor blog summary; undated; underlying studies not fully cited.
[S5] Performance Standards for Coding Professionals; HIM productivity survey. Rose T. Dunn / Journal of AHIMA (as reproduced in an AAPC forum), 1996. Pre-ICD-10 — historical Link
What it measured: Daily volumes for ER and outpatient test coding reported by HIM departments. Limitations: Old data (1996) reproduced secondhand; coding rules and systems have changed substantially.
[S6] Coder Productivity (community discussion). AAPC community forum, undated. Link
What it measured: Practitioner-reported productivity expectations at their own organizations. Limitations: Community-reported, not an AAPC standard; small, self-selected sample; undated.
[S7] Hospital ER facility coder job posting (10 charts/hour standard). AAPC Jobs, 2026. Link
What it measured: The productivity standard one hospital states for its ED coders (facility and professional). Limitations: A single employer's posted expectation.
[S8] Coding Standards (citing a JustCoding.com survey of 250 coders). Physicians Practice, 2005. Pre-ICD-10 — historical Link
What it measured: Median charts per hour reported by coders in medical and surgical practices; notes anesthesia as a difficult specialty to benchmark. Limitations: Pre-ICD-10; survey of coders rather than measured time study.
[S9] Specialty and radiology daily volumes (community discussion). AAPC community forum, undated. Link
What it measured: Daily volumes practitioners reported for family practice, specialties and radiology. Limitations: Community-reported; undated; not an AAPC standard.
[S10] How many cases per day? (community discussion). AAPC community forum, undated. Link
What it measured: Daily volumes reported for ED professional-fee coders. Limitations: Community-reported; undated; not an AAPC standard.
[S11] ED facility + professional team standards (community discussion). AAPC community forum, undated. Link
What it measured: Standards a multi-hospital ED coding team described for coders who code both facility and professional charts, by experience level. Limitations: Community-reported; one team's description; undated.
[S12] Survey: Production expectations for reviews, re-reviews. ACDIS, undated. Link
What it measured: CDI specialists' reported daily new reviews and re-reviews. Limitations: Survey of members; programs differ widely in scope and focus.
[S13] Q&A: CDI productivity (CDI Strategies Vol. 17, Issue 9). ACDIS, undated. Link
What it measured: Typical daily review totals, follow-up reviews per case and staffing ratios discussed by CDI leaders. Limitations: Expert Q&A rather than a measured study.
[S14] Q&A: Productivity measures for CDI specialists. ACDIS, undated. Link
What it measured: Common CDI staffing ratios (specialists per annual discharges). Limitations: Expert Q&A; ratios depend on payer scope and program design.
[S15] Occupational Outlook Handbook: Medical Records Specialists, Pay. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2025. Link
What it measured: National median and percentile pay for medical records specialists (which includes coders), overall and by industry (May 2025). Limitations: Broad occupation; does not separate coder specialties or credentials; national figures.
[S16] Hospital Inpatient Coder hourly pay. Payscale, 2026. Link
What it measured: Self-reported hourly pay for hospital inpatient coders. Limitations: Self-reported; tends to run below BLS figures.
[S17] Medical Coding Auditor salary. Payscale, 2026. Link
What it measured: Self-reported average and range of pay for coding auditors. Limitations: Self-reported sample.
[S18] 2025 CDI Salary Survey figures. ACDIS, 2025. Link
What it measured: Salary bands reported by CDI professionals. Limitations: Member survey; bands rather than exact medians.
[S19] Employer Costs for Employee Compensation, June 2026. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2026. Link
What it measured: Average employer cost per hour worked for wages and each benefit category, including for health care and social assistance. Limitations: Industry average; individual employers' benefits differ.

Evidence grades

A — Published study
B — Published standard or survey
C — Community-reported
D — BW Interests estimate

This analysis is an estimate for planning purposes only. It is based on the inputs provided and on published or industry reference points, which are starting points rather than standards. It is not a guarantee of staffing needs, productivity, costs or results.