Tenet enters $395 million settlement for unnecessary cardiac procedures
Compliance Monitor, December 29, 2004
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
Tenet Healthcare Corp. agreed December 21 to pay $395 million to settle lawsuits alleging unnecessary heart procedures at one of its former facilities, the Associated Press (AP) reported.
According to the AP, the funds will be divided among more than 750 plaintiffs who alleged that they received unnecessary cardiac catheterizations and bypass surgeries while patients at Tenet's former Redding (CA) Medical Center. All of the alleged procedures took place before November 2002.
The agreement will be finalized upon approval by the individual plaintiffs and through procedural court requirements. The AP reports that the settlement will force Tenet to open a new bank credit line in early 2005.
Tenet sold its Redding facility, located about 180 miles north of Sacramento, to North Carolina-based Hospital Partners of America in September. The gross proceeds of the sale, which included the 246-bed facility, the property, and the equipment, represented about $55 million.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
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
-
- 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
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- E-mailed
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Q&A: Follow CMS' coding guidelines when using modifier -25
- 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
- Q/A. One injection code or two?
- Cohesive History and Physical Requirements
- Searched