Note from Hugh
Medicare Weekly Update, June 26, 2007
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Medicare Weekly Update!
As discussed below, last week, CMS issued a MLN Matters article "clarifying" a transmittal that CMS has previously issued on certain changes to the codes subject to skilled nursing facility (SNF) consolidated billing. At first blush, hospitals may think that this is a "SNF issue" that doesn't affect hospital billing. However, the SNF consolidated billing requirements can affect hospitals because if a hospital furnishes services to a SNF resident that are subject to SNF consolidated billing, the hospital may not bill Medicare for the services. Rather, the hospital must bill the SNF.
Both last week's MLN Matters article and the preceding transmittal announced that the diagnostic mammography codes (CPT codes 77055 and 77056) are no longer included as "Major Category IV" codes in the SNF consolidated billing files. Major Category IV is intended to list "preventative and screening services" that are not included in the SNF Prospective Payment System but are covered under Medicare Part B and must be billed by the SNF for patients in a SNF Part A stay. Presumably CMS made this change in recognition of the fact that CPT codes 77055 and 77056 represent diagnostic services rather than preventative or screening services.
One might think because the diagnostic mammography codes are being deleted from the Major Category IV list, hospitals will now be permitted to bill Medicare directly for diagnostic mammography services furnished to SNF residents. However, that does not appear to be the case. Rather, because these codes represent diagnostic services that fall within the scope of services covered under the SNF Prospective Payment System, it appears hospitals will need to continue to bill diagnostic mammography services furnished to SNF Part A residents to the SNF rather than to Medicare directly.
As usual, hospitals should confirm the implications of this change with their local FI (or MAC). 
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Medicare Weekly Update!
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
- 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
- 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
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Q/A. One injection code or two?
- ED-to-inpatient transfers are flawed with safety gaps
- Searched
