Teledentistry — Asynchronous; Store-and-Forward Template

Teledentistry (asynchronous, store-and-forward).

Submission Information:
Date received: Date received
Time reviewed: Time reviewed
Submitted by: Submitted by

Patient Information:

Teledentistry support: Consent, synchronous/asynchronous modality, limitations explained
Materials reviewed: Photos/radiographs/questionnaire/history received
Response/follow-up: Findings communicated, response date/time, in-person follow-up need
Medical history on file.
Consent for teledentistry.

Chief Complaint/Reason for Consultation:

Materials Received:
Intraoral photographs: Intraoral photographs
Radiographs: Radiographs taken/reviewed and findings
Patient questionnaire/history.
Clinical notes (if from provider).
Other: Other

Quality Assessment:
Image quality: Image quality
Radiograph quality: Radiograph quality
Sufficient information for assessment: Sufficient information for assessment

Review Findings:

From Photographs:

From Radiographs:

From Patient History/Questionnaire:

Assessment:
Preliminary diagnosis: Preliminary diagnosis
Confidence level: Confidence level
Limitations of assessment: Limitations of assessment

Recommendations: Recommendations

Communication:
Response sent via: Response sent via
Date/time sent: Date/time sent
Response included: Response included
Assessment summary.
Recommendations.
Need for in-person visit: Need for in-person visit
Prescription (if applicable): Prescription or none
Patient education materials.

Follow-Up Required:
In-person examination: In-person examination
Additional images needed: Additional images needed
Specialist referral: Referral details
No follow-up needed.

Turnaround Time:
Time from receipt to response: Time from receipt to response

NV: Next visit

Documentation requirements

A defensible asynchronous teledentistry note has to prove three things: (1) what was sent, (2) who reviewed it and when, and (3) what was concluded and communicated back. Required elements:

• Patient consent for teledentistry — written or electronic, modality-specific (asynchronous/store-and-forward explicitly named), and signed before the encounter. Many state Medicaid programs require the consent reference the asynchronous nature, the limitations of remote review, and the patient's right to an in-person visit.
• Originating site and distant site — where the materials were captured (school, nursing home, FQHC, mobile unit, patient home) and where the reviewing dentist is located. Some payers require the originating-site address in the chart.
• Provider credentials and licensure — name, license number, and state of licensure of the reviewing dentist; the dentist must be licensed in the state where the patient is located at the time of capture.
• Date and time materials received; date and time reviewed — both timestamps, separately. The gap between receipt and review is the turnaround time most state Medicaid auditors look at.
• Materials reviewed — itemized — list every photo, radiograph, video, scan, and questionnaire by type and area (e.g., "5 intraoral photos: facial, max occlusal, mand occlusal, R buccal, L buccal; 2 PAs #14 and #19; medical-history questionnaire dated 4/22/2026"). Also note the technology used (HIPAA-compliant platform name).
• Quality assessment of received materials — diagnostic-quality statement for each image type. If quality is insufficient, document that finding and what was requested as a remediation (retake, additional views, in-person visit). "Image quality adequate for limited assessment" is a common defensible phrasing.
• Findings — separated by source — what you saw on photos vs. what you saw on radiographs vs. what the history reports. Auditors expect this to read like an interpretation, not a summary.
• Preliminary diagnosis and confidence level — name the working diagnosis and explicitly state the limitations of remote review ("preliminary impression pending in-person confirmation"). The "limitations of asynchronous review" sentence is one of the items ADA guidance flag as commonly missing.
• Recommendations and disposition — in-person visit needed (urgent / routine / not needed), additional images requested, specialist referral, prescription if applicable, patient education provided.
• Communication back to patient or referring provider — date, time, method (portal message, secure email, phone, written report), and what was conveyed. Include a copy or summary in the chart.
• Underlying procedure code — the evaluation, screening, or consultation code that this teledentistry encounter supports (e.g., D0140, D0170, D0190, D9310). The teledentistry code is always reported in addition to that code, never alone.
• Place of service / claim modifiers — many payers and state Medicaid programs require POS code 02 (telehealth other than home) or 10 (telehealth in patient's home), and some require the GT or 95 modifier on the underlying procedure. The chart note should mirror what the claim shows.
• Reviewing dentist signature — required, with date and time of sign-off.

Common documentation gaps that drive denials: missing consent specifically referencing asynchronous modality; no separate receipt-vs-review timestamps; quality of received materials not addressed; recommendations communicated but not documented in the chart; underlying procedure code missing from the same claim.

Common denial reasons

The most common reasons asynchronous teledentistry claims are denied, downgraded, or audited:

• Billed alone without an underlying procedure code — the teledentistry code is a reporting/modifier line. Payers auto-reject claims missing D0140, D0170, D0190, D9310, or another covered service on the same claim.
• No documented consent specific to asynchronous modality — generic teledentistry consent or in-office consent does not satisfy the payer requirement. Several state Medicaid programs explicitly cite asynchronous modality in the consent template.
• Receipt and review timestamps missing or identical — auditors look for a realistic store-and-forward gap. A note that says materials were "received and reviewed at 10:14 AM" reads as a synchronous encounter and gets miscoded.
• Materials not itemized — "photos and x-rays reviewed" without listing the specific images, areas, and quality is a frequent documentation failure.
• Quality of received materials not addressed — payers expect a diagnostic-quality statement and a plan for any inadequate images.
• No limitations-of-remote-review statement — the chart must acknowledge that asynchronous review is preliminary and what its diagnostic limits are. Missing this language is an audit flag specifically called out in.
• Wrong place-of-service code or modifier — POS 02 / POS 10 and modifier GT or 95 mismatches between chart documentation and claim form drive rejections.
• Cross-state licensure issue — reviewing dentist not licensed in the patient's state at the time of capture. Some carriers and most state Medicaid programs verify this.
• Communication back to patient not documented — recommendations were made but the chart doesn't show how, when, or to whom they were conveyed.
• Same-day duplicate teledentistry codes — synchronous and asynchronous on the same DOS without separately documented encounters typically denies one of the two.
• Carrier doesn't reimburse the teledentistry code at all — Delta Dental treats it as descriptive only. The denial here isn't a documentation problem; the underlying evaluation should still pay.
• Missing reviewing dentist signature with timestamp — automated audits flag this immediately.
• Pediatric over-billing pattern — high-volume school screening programs that bill teledentistry on every encounter without distinct findings have drawn state Medicaid recoupments.

Related templates