split/shared vs incident to

In the office setting does split/shared and incident to mean two different things?

Example #1: the PA and the physician are both seeing an established patient with an established problem, which to me, makes this a split/shared visit. My question: does the physician have to document the portions of the visit he personally performed?

Example #2: the PA sees an established patient in which the physician has formulated a treatment plan. The PA is able to bill under the physician's name and number becuase "incident to" has been met?

It is this part that is confusing me:

Office/Clinic Setting ? In the office/clinic setting when the physician performs the E/M service, the service must be reported using the physician?s NPI. When an E/M service is a shared/split encounter between a physician and a non-physician practitioner (NP, PA, CNS or CNM), the service is considered to have been performed ?incident to? if the requirements for ?incident to? are met and the patient is an established patient. If ?incident to? requirements are not met for the shared/split E/M service, the service must be billed under the non-physician?s NPI, and payment will be made at the appropriate physician fee schedule payment.[/size]

So is that saying the physician does not need to document the key portions of the visit he performed?

split/shared vs incident to