CAHs get a break on physician supervision rules for 2010
Briefings on APCs, June 1, 2010
This is an excerpt from a member only article. To read the article in its entirety, please login or subscribe to Briefings on APCs.
The requirements in the 2010 OPPS final rule conflicted with their Conditions of Participation (CoP) and the EMTALA rules that CAHs had already been abiding by. A strong grassroots effort by numerous CAHs and the Provider Roundtable helped bring the conflict to CMS’ attention and resulted in a reprieve for CAHs. (For more on one facility’s efforts, see the related story on p. 8.)
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
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
