CMS delays implementing parts of the anti-markup provision
Compliance Monitor, January 9, 2008
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
CMS will delay implementation of parts of the anti-markup provision until January 1, 2009, according to a final rule published in the Federal Register on January 3, 2008. The revised rule had been scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2008.
Under the revised rule, payment for the technical component and professional component of diagnostic tests purchased by physicians or suppliers from an outside supplier or performed at sites other than the "office of the billing physician or other supplier" is limited to the lowest of:
- the performing supplier's net charge to the billing physician or supplier
- the billing physician or supplier's actual charge
- the fee schedule amount
During the comment period, CMS received feedback that the definition of "office of the billing physician or other supplier" is unclear and could have unintended consequences. CMS decided to postpone implementing the rule for one year to study the issue further.
Provisions regarding the technical component of all purchased diagnostic tests and anatomic pathology diagnostic testing services furnished in space that is utilized by a physician group practice as a "centralized building" that does not qualify as a "same building" under the Stark Law are not included in the delay.
Click here to read the notice in the Federal Register.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
Comments
0 comments on “CMS delays implementing parts of the anti-markup provision ”
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Identify potential Medicaid RAC target areas
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- Q&A: Acute respiratory failure diagnosis does not require intubation
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- E-mailed
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- Oxygen Cylinder Storage Requirements
- Q&A: Acute respiratory failure diagnosis does not require intubation
- Q&A: Follow CMS' coding guidelines when using modifier -25
- Understand the spine to code back procedures correctly
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Hospitals are not bound by InterQual criteria for determining patient status
- Searched
