‘Clarification’ muddies the waters on lab order signatures
Briefings on APCs, December 1, 2009
This is an excerpt from a member only article. To read the article in its entirety, please login or subscribe to Briefings on APCs.
In the proposed rule, CMS includes a section on physician orders and restates what it calls its “long-standing” policy that the ordering physician or nonphysician practitioner must sign the written order for diagnostic tests, such as x-rays and lab tests. CMS says its policy does not require signatures on requisitions for lab tests.
Despite what CMS now says was long-standing policy, Hoy says many healthcare organizations have operated under CMS’ previously stated position that they did not need a signed order for laboratory tests.
This is an excerpt from a member only article. To read the article in its entirety, please login or subscribe to Briefings on APCs.
Related Products
-
Modifier -59 Case Studies: Clarify Common Coding Confusion
Modifier -59 is a perennial problem area for outpatient coders. It shouldn’t be viewed as a way to guarantee payment but...
-
Outpatient Therapy Billing Challenges: Limit the Impact of Reduced Payments
During this 90-minute audio conference, you’ll learn how to adjust your practice to limit financial impact of payment...
-
Outpatient Bed Charge Capture: Billing for Common and Complex Cases
During this 90-minute audio conference, our expert speakers walk you through common and complex cases and explain compliant...
-
Billing No-Cost and Low-Cost Devices: Tips to Avoid the Audit Fast Track
During this 90-minute audio conference, our speakers will use a case study to demonstrate best practices to help you comply...
-
JustCoding Demonstration June 2011: Meet the Coder’s Best Friend
Join us for a FREE demonstration of JustCoding, thw powerful website that's the continuing education destination for coding...
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- HIPAA Q&A: Flu shot requirement for hospital employees
- HealthDataInsights posts new issues for medical necessity claims
- Running an effective peer review committee meeting
- Q&A: Incidental disclosures and patient privacy
- Sneak Peek: Effort underway to establish caseload benchmarks
- New FAQ posted on storing laryngoscope blades
- Tip: Perform your own internal investigation prior to government audit
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- HIPAA 5010 deadline extended, but threat remains, says AMA
- HHS task force: Consider privacy, security with text messages
- E-mailed
-
- Running an effective peer review committee meeting
- HIPAA Q&A: Flu shot requirement for hospital employees
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- HHS task force: Consider privacy, security with text messages
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Tip: Correctly code bilateral pain management procedures
- 2012 CPT code changes for ASCs: Shoulder and knee scopes and pain management
- COT basics to best
- Documentation and coding for toxic metabolic encephalopathy
- Guidance and tact key to compliant, effective physician queries
- Searched