Hospitals to receive $666M in back Medicare benefits
Compliance Monitor, March 19, 2008
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
The hospitals will split $666 million in back payments which stem from shifts in Medicare reimbursement policies dating back to the 1980s, according to a Wall Street Journal article.
In 1986, the Reagan administration changed reimbursement rules to exclude some low-income patients from disproportionate-share payment calculations. A group of hospitals successfully sued to have the rule changed in 1997.
In 2002, Baystate Medical Center in Springfield, MA, became the first hospital to sue CMS and the Department of Health and Human Services for back payment for treatments it provided to patients starting in the early 1990s. More hospitals followed and the number of plaintiffs grew to 667.
U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman ruled in favor of the hospitals in 2004. The government lost an appeal in 2005 and the Supreme Court declined to hear the case in 2006. Settlement talks began in 2006.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
Comments
0 comments on “Hospitals to receive $666M in back Medicare benefits ”
Related Products
-
Strategies for Health Care Compliance
News and real-life examples to increase the effectiveness of your compliance program. Strategies for Health Care Compliance...
-
Compliance Monitor
This HTML e-mail newsletter delivers news on Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse, as well as recent documents and targets...
-
Medicare Weekly Update
Each issue of Medicare Weekly Update includes the latest CMS proposed and final rules, CMS manual revisions, and...
-
Medicare Update for Physician Services
Medicare Update for Physician Services is a free, monthly e-zine that delivers news and information to help physician...
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: Follow CMS' coding guidelines when using modifier -25
- Understand the spine to code back procedures correctly
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Searched