Audit

Published on: September 30, 2013

CMS Releases Comparative Billing Reports for Spinal Orthotics and Ordering Providers

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) recently released a national provider Comparative Billing Report (CBR) focused on spinal orthotics and ordering providers. This CBR was conducted in response to an Office of Inspector General (OIG) report on inappropriate Medicare payments for orthotics. The Medicare Durable Medical Equipment (DME) data obtained for this report span from dates of service beginning January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012. The final data was retrieved on August 15, 2013 from the Integrated Data Repository (IDR).

Under contract by CMS, Safeguard Services LLC is the authorized producer of all CBRs. Safeguard sends CBRs to about 5,000 ordering providers to help providers prevent improper billings. This CBR provides comparative data to orthotic providers across the nation to compare orthotics providers in terms of coding and billing practice, as well as utilization patterns. The sample spinal orthotics CBR may be useful to review if your entity did not receive one from Safeguard.

The following Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes were analyzed in this CBR:

Published on: September 18, 2013

OIG Releases Report on RACs and the Actions Taken by CMS to Address Improper Payments, Fraud Referrals, and Performance

by Wachler & Associates, P.C.

In August 2013, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a study addressing problems and vulnerabilities in Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) activities, as well as their oversight by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). RACs are tasked with identifying improper payments and are paid on a contingency fee basis according to their findings. RACs are also obligated to refer potential fraud to CMS.

The report addresses RACs’ efforts at identifying improper payments and potential fraud for the fiscal years (FYs) 2010-2011 and emphasizes the importance of effective CMS oversight over the RACs. The OIG set out to discover and report on four main objectives, including the extent to which:

1. RACs identified improper payments for services billed to the Medicare program;

Published on: August 7, 2013

CMS Issues Much Anticipated Final Rules on Payment of Medicare Part B Inpatient Services and Payment of Hospital Inpatient Services under Medicare Part A

by Wachler & Associates, P.C.

On August 2, 2013, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) released its much-anticipated final rules, CMS-1455-F and CMS-1599-F, finalizing two previously issued proposals that addressed payment policies related to patient status in short-stay hospital cases: (1) payment of Medicare Part B inpatient services; and (2) admission and medical review criteria for payment of hospital inpatient services under Medicare Part A. The effective date of the final rule is October 1, 2013.

Notwithstanding these final rules, CMS stated that hospitals will be permitted to follow the Part B billing timeframes established in CMS-1455R Ruling regarding appeals and the submission of Part B claims after the effective date of the final rule, provided (1) the Part A inpatient claim denial was one to which the Ruling originally applied; or (2) the Part A inpatient claim has a date of admission before October 1, 2013, and is denied after September 30, 2013, on the grounds that the medical care was reasonable and necessary, but the inpatient admission was not.

Payment of Medicare Part B Inpatient Services

Published on: August 1, 2013

What Do Providers Need to Know About Medicaid RACs?

by Wachler & Associates, P.C.

In 2005, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid started the Medicare Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) program in three pilot states, where the program recovered over $900 million dollars during the three-year pilot. Due to the success of the pilot program, CMS expanded the program to all states in 2010, and has since recovered over three billion dollars. The success of the Medicare RACs resulted in the expansion of the current RAC program to Medicaid and Medicare Parts C and D through Section 6411 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

The ACA requires states to:

Contract with a RAC to ensure that overpayments and underpayments by the state Medicaid agency are identified, and that overpayments are recouped;

Published on: July 31, 2013

The Medicare Appeals Process Is Overburdened

by Wachler & Associates, P.C.

Healthcare and healthcare law professionals across the country are noticing that as Medicare audit numbers are climbing, so too is the length of the Medicare appeals process. Once a provider or healthcare entity receives a denial from a Medicare contractor, the Medicare appeals process consists of five stages:

• Redetermination, which is filed with a Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC)

• Reconsideration, which is filed with a Qualified Independent Contractor (QIC)

Published on: July 30, 2013

Medicare and Medicaid Program Integrity: MACs and ZPICs out, UPICs in

by Wachler & Associates, P.C.

Last Friday, the vice president of legal affairs for the American Health Care Association (AHCA), Dianna De La Mare, reported that CMS will be combining the integrity responsibilities of the Zone Program Integrity Contractors (ZPICs) and the Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) into one integrity contractor. These newly designated integrity contractors, the Unified Program Integrity Contractors (UPIC), will focus on both Medicare and Medicaid integrity issues. Dianna De La Mar also reported that the new UPICs will encompass the MAC integrity responsibilities and will retire the Medicaid Integrity Contractors (MICs).

Follow the Wachler & Associates Health Law Blog for updates on UPICs and other important health law issues. If you have any questions regarding how UPICs may affect your practice, please contact an experienced health care attorney at Wachler & Associates attorney at 248-544-0888.

Published on: July 29, 2013

Increased Scrutiny on Medicare Sleep Study Payments

by Wachler & Associates, P.C.

Ensuring comprehensive documentation procedures are in place has become increasingly vital for all providers. However, recently compliance plans have become even more important for sleep labs, sleep centers, hospital-based sleep service providers, and non-hospital-based sleep service providers seeking Medicare reimbursement. According to a FY 2013 Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) report, Medicare payments for sleep study services have dramatically increased since 2001, growing four-fold from $62 million in 2001 to $235 million in 2011. As a result of increased Medicare spending for sleep-related procedures, there is a spotlight on the appropriateness of Medicare-billed services.

Sleep study services encompass issues such as studies for obstructive sleep apnea (the most common sleep disorder), full-night sleep diagnostic studies, split-night studies, and full-night titration studies. Medicare reimburses sleep study providers at prearranged and set rates for polysomnography (the most popular tool utilized to diagnose sleep disorders), applicable services from the inpatient prospective payment system, the outpatient prospective payment system, the Physician Fee Schedule, and a range of sleep studies.

Sleep study service providers receiving Medicare payments should be prepared for the OIG’s scrutiny throughout 2013 by ensuring that claims are made according to Medicare regulations. In order to ensure proper compliance for full Medicare reimbursement, sleep study service providers must follow certain documentation and procedural requirements. Among other requirements, all documentation must provide rationale for services that were provided, as well as rationale for how providers arrived at a billing status. Detailed documentation is more important than ever.

Published on: July 16, 2013

OIG Reports Surgical Products Rebate Program Qualifies for Safe Harbor Protection from Anti-Kickback Statute

by Wachler & Associates, P.C.

On June 24, 2013, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued an advisory opinion announcing that by request of a surgical products manufacturer (the “Requestor”), based on the certifications and information provided, a proposed tiered rebate program will meet the requirements of the discount safe harbor of the anti-kickback statute (AKS) and will not generate prohibited remuneration under the AKS. Thus, the OIG concluded that it would not impose administrative sanctions in connection with the proposed arrangement.

The AKS makes it a criminal offense to knowingly and willfully offer, pay, solicit, or receive any remuneration to induce or reward referrals of items or services reimbursable by a Federal health care program. At the discretion of the OIG, a violation of the AKS may constitute a felony punishable by imprisonment fines, or both, possible exclusion from Federal health care programs, and possible administrative proceedings and civil monetary penalties. However, safe harbor protection may be afforded to arrangements that meet all of the conditions set forth in the applicable AKS safe harbor. The regulatory AKS safe harbor for discounts interprets the Social Security Act’s exception for discounts, which protects “a discount or other reduction in price obtained by a provider of services or other entity under a Federal health care program if the reduction in price is properly disclosed and appropriately reflected in the costs claimed or charges made by the provider or entity under a Federal health care program.”

In this advisory opinion, the Requestor, a corporation that manufactures ophthalmologic products including pharmaceuticals, surgical equipment, and vision aids, sought an advisory opinion on whether a proposed arrangement would generate prohibited remuneration under the AKS. The Requestor’s proposed arrangement involved tiered, percentage-based rebates based on customer purchases of federally reimbursable and non-federally reimbursable surgical products. The rebate would be calculated based on a customer’s total annual purchases of such products regardless of whether such products are reimbursable by Federal health care programs and would not vary based on the volume of Federally reimbursable products purchased. In addition, the Requestor certified the various manners in which it would notify all customers receiving rebates of their obligation to report any rebates received based on sales of Federally reimbursable surgical products. Further, the Requestor certified that it would refrain from doing anything to impede the customer’s ability to meet its obligations under the AKS discount safe harbor.

Published on: June 27, 2013

OIG Announces $3.8 Billion in Expected Recoveries

by Wachler & Associates, P.C.

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) recently announced that it expects to recover an estimated $3.8 billion in overall recoveries for the first half of fiscal year 2013. This report covers October 1, 2012 through March 31, 2013.

The OIG’s semiannual report is released every 6 months to keep Congress and the HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius informed of the OIG’s important findings, recommendations, and activities. In connection with its Medicare and Medicaid investigations, audits, and reviews, the OIG anticipates $521 million in audit receivables and $3.28 billion in investigative receivables.

In the report’s introductory message, Inspector General Daniel R. Levinson attributed the department’s success to the OIG’s cooperative activities and effective partnerships with organizations such as the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT). The OIG featured the following items in its semiannual report:

Published on: June 27, 2013

RACs to Carefully Review IMRT Treatment Claims

by Wachler & Associates, P.C.

The Recovery Audit Contractors (RACs) have issued a complex review targeting intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). IMRT has been used in radiation oncology to treat many different types of cancer by modulating high intensity X-ray beams directed at a tumor and thus minimizing the amount of radiation to healthy tissue. In the aggregate, IMRT uses significantly lower doses of radiation than traditional treatment.

Beginning July 18, 2013, the RACs will be looking more carefully at the medical necessity of IMRT treatment as well as whether the diagnoses listed on claims for reimbursement are also listed in the local coverage determination (LCD). Practitioners should review the coding and medical necessity sections in the LCD to determine whether the patient’s condition meets these standards. The LCD also sets forth strong documentation requirements for IMRT that should be carefully reviewed, including, among other items, the need for performing IMRT, prescription of a treatment plan, target verification methodology and documentation, an approved IMRT inverse plan (PTV), immobilization and positioning documentation, fluence distribution in the phantom, monitor units, and respiratory motion.

If you need assistance defending a Medicare audit or need help creating a compliance plan, please contact an experienced health care attorney at 248-544-0888.