New Stark law regulations loom over healthcare professionals
Compliance Monitor, September 30, 2009
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
Significant changes to the federal Physician Self-Referral Law, or Stark Law, will take effect October 1, creating potential compliance liabilities for physicians and hospitals, reports the American Medical News (AMN).
CMS proposed the changes to the Stark Law, considered to be one of the most complex regulations in healthcare, in the 2009 IPPS final rule. CMS will eliminate:
• “Under arrangement” contracts, in which hospitals contract with physician-owned entities to provide ancillary services
• Per use or “per-click” payments for equipment and space leases
• Compensation deals based on percentage of revenue generated by space or equipment use
Unlike other liability statues, Stark law violations do not depend on a physician’s intent to defraud. “Stark is a strict-liability statute. So even if you have the most innocent of intentions, you are still subject to the grossest of penalties, as if you meant to violate the law,” said Lawrence W. Vernaglia, Esq., co-chair of Foley & Lardner LLP’s national healthcare payments, fraud and abuse, and compliance work group.
Under the new rule, CMS will consider physicians to have a direct ownership stake in the designated health services they provide, basically eradicating referrals unless they comply with Stark’s stricter ownership exceptions, reports AMN.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- 2010 ICD-9 code updates now available online
- The Joint Commission extends its accreditation to advanced diagnostic imaging
- FDA extends time to replace Steris sterilizing system
- Use PEPPER reports to stay on top of common coding errors
- CMS clarifies physician signatures needed on all lab orders
- Greeley Reflections
- Q&A: EHR audit log retention
- Q/A: Select correct revenue code for packaged drugs
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- See one, do one, teach one: Do you have a peer review training program?
- E-mailed
-
- FDA extends time to replace Steris sterilizing system
- Q&A: Impact of SOI/ROM on DRG assignment
- The Joint Commission extends its accreditation to advanced diagnostic imaging
- CMS clarifies physician signatures needed on all lab orders
- Use PEPPER reports to stay on top of common coding errors
- Q/A: Select correct revenue code for packaged drugs
- Credentialing and privileging monthly: ABP may point maintenance of certification in a new direction
- Meaningful use calls for meaningful risk analysis
- Watch for corridor clutter under top-cited LS.02.01.20
- Cohesive History and Physical Requirements
- Searched
