OIG: CMS overpaid $5.9 million for interrupted rehab stays
Compliance Monitor, January 11, 2006
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
TThe OIG has recommended that CMS direct its fiscal intermediaries to recover $5.9 million in overpayments to rehabilitation facilities (IRF). The overpayments were billed in noncompliance with regulations for interrupted stays, according to the OIG.
To perform the audit, the OIG used a nationwide computer match designed to identify interrupted stays billed as multiple claims. The audit found that found that during 2002 and 2003, Medicare made net overpayments of $5.9 million to 589 IRFs for interrupted stays billed as two or more claims.
The OIG further recommended that CMS use the audit results to clarify guidance to IRFs regarding the correct billing of interrupted stays and strengthen the edit in its Common Working File to detect all interrupted stays incorrectly billed as two or more claims.
CMS implemented the prospective payment system for cost reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2002. The IRF payment system uses federal prospective payment rates across 100 distinct case-mix groups. A number of adjustments may apply to the case-mix-group payment, including adjustments for interrupted stays in which a Medicare inpatient is discharged from an IRF and returns to the same IRF within three consecutive calendar days. For payment purposes, the IRF should combine the interrupted stay into a single claim and receive a single discharge payment.
Click here to read the audit report, "Nationwide Review of Compliance With the Interrupted Stay Provision of the Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility Prospective Payment System for Calendar Years 2002 and 2003," (A-01-04-00525) issued December 19, 2005.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
Related Products
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
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Identify potential Medicaid RAC target areas
- 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
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- 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
