CMS adjusts payment policy for replacement devices in IPPS proposed rule
Recovery Auditor Report, June 2, 2011
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Recovery Auditor Report!
Editor's note: This article is the second in a series of three IPPS-related updates. The first can be found here.
As previously stated, the April 19 inpatient prospective payment system (IPPS) proposed rule contains an abundance of notable clarifications and updates that will affect multiple departments. Of these proposals, CMS’ clarification on payment for recalled and replaced devices stand out as one of the most significant for providers.
The 2008 IPPS rule implemented a policy that reduced a hospital’s IPPS payment for certain MS-DRGs where the implantation of a device that had been recalled determined the base MS-DRG assignment for that procedure. At that time, CMS stated it would “reduce a hospital’s IPPS payment for those MS-DRGs where the hospital received a credit equal to 50% or more of the cost of the device when a manufacturer provided a credit for a recalled device”.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Recovery Auditor Report!
Related Products
-
Billing Alert for Long-Term Care
It's essential to know how to correctly submit your Medicare claims in order to get the reimbursement your facility...
-
Core Skills for Hospital Case Managers:
A guide to fundamental case management responsibilities, Core Skills for Hospital Case Managers serves as a training...
-
Prevent Denials and Win Appeals:
Hospital case managers and directors of case management will find Prevent Denials and Win Appeals to be a valuable partner...
-
2011 ICD-9-CM Manual Volumes 1 and 2
HCPro is pleased to introduce the 2011 ICD-9-CM Manual Volumes 1 & 2 for professional and non-acute care settings. Reserve...
-
2012 ICD-9-CM Code Changes: The new, revised, and deleted codes
During this 90-minute audio conference, our nationally recognized speakers, Dr. Robert Gold and Gloryanne Bryant, will...
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- HIPAA Q&A: Answering service messages
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Q&A: Coding for dry skin due to cold weather
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Are your workforce members texting PHI?
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- Privacy, security concerns high in HIEs
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- E-mailed
-
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- HIPAA Q&A: Answering service messages
- Q&A: Coding for sepsis when other conditions are present
- HIPAA Q&A: TPO disclosures to a business associate
- Are your workforce members texting PHI?
- Q&A: Coding for dry skin due to cold weather
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- Don't let these sentinel events trigger falsely
- Searched