Billing Incident to Services-Whose Number Should Be Used?
December 29th, 2015 - Seth Canterbury, CPC, ACS-EMShould You Bill Incident to Services for a Medicare Patient Under The Number of the “Supervising Physician” or the “Ordering Physician”?
This issue was first clarified in the preamble of the 11/1/01 Federal Register (available here on p. 23 of the file, p. 55267 of the document):
Comment: Several commenters requested that we clarify and distinguish between the physician (or other practitioner) ordering the incident to service and the physician (or other practitioner) supervising the auxiliary personnel who perform the incident to service. They stated that confusion exists as to whose Medicare Part B billing number should be used on the claim form.
Response: Inherent in the definition of an incident to service is the requirement that the incident to service be furnished incident to a professional service of a physician (or other practitioner). When a claim is submitted to Medicare under the billing number of a physician (or other practitioner) for an incident to service, the physician is stating that he or she either performed the service or directly supervised the auxiliary personnel performing the service. Accordingly, the Medicare billing number of the ordering physician (or other practitioner) should not be used if that person did not directly supervise the auxiliary personnel. We added language to the supervision requirement set forth in § 410.26(b)(5) to reflect this clarification.
(5) Services and supplies must be furnished under the direct supervision of the physician (or other practitioner). The physician (or other practitioner) directly supervising the auxiliary personnel need not be the same physician (or other practitioner) upon whose professional service the incident to service is based.
This clarification was manualized via Transmittal 148 (Change Request 3138) on 4/23/04. The field designations mentioned in that transmittal have since changed, so instead of quoting from that, here are relevant excerpts from the current [as of 10/16/09] manual (Claims Processing Manual, Chapter 26, Section 10.4 here):
Ordering physician - is a physician or, when appropriate, a non-physician practitioner who orders non-physician services for the patient.
When a service is incident to the service of a physician or non-physician practitioner, the name of the physician or non-physician practitioner who performs the initial service and orders the non-physician service must appear in item 17
Item 17b Form CMS-1500 – Enter the NPI of the referring/ordering physician listed in item 17. All physicians who order services or refer Medicare beneficiaries must report this data.
Item 24J - Enter the rendering provider’s PIN in the shaded portion. In the case of a service provided incident to the service of a physician or non-physician practitioner, when the person who ordered the service is not supervising, enter the PIN of the supervisor in the shaded portion.
Enter the rendering provider’s NPI number in the lower unshaded portion. In the case of a service provided incident to the service of a physician or non-physician practitioner, when the person who ordered the service is not supervising, enter the NPI of the supervisor in the lower unshaded portion.
Item 31 - Enter the signature of provider of service or supplier, or his/her representative, and either the 6-digit date (MM | DD | YY), 8-digit date (MM | DD | CCYY), or alpha-numeric date (e.g., January 1, 1998) the form was signed.
In the case of a service that is provided incident to the service of a physician or non-physician practitioner, when the ordering physician or non-physician practitioner is directly supervising the service as in 42 CFR 410.32, the signature of the ordering physician or non-physician practitioner shall be entered in item 31. When the ordering physician or non-physician practitioner is not supervising the service, then enter the signature of the physician or non-physician practitioner providing the direct supervision in item 31.
NOTE: This is a required field, however the claim can be processed if the following is true. If a physician, supplier, or authorized person's signature is missing, but the signature is on file; or if any authorization is attached to the claim or if the signature field has "Signature on File" and/or a computer generated signature. [All emphasis (in red) in the manual quote above was added.]
Based on the information above, the “rendering provider” (the person you bill under) for the later incident to service is the “supervising physician”—the one meeting the “direct supervision” requirement for the incident to service by being “in the office suite”, not the original “ordering physician”—the one initiating care but not “in the office” for the subsequent encounter. However, the ordering physician’s information must still be noted on the claim when it was a different provider from the one supervising the later incident to service.
Seth Canterbury, CPC, ACS-EM
Education Specialist
University of Florida Jacksonville Physicians, Inc.
Clinical Data Quality-Education Department
653 West Eight Street
Tower I, Suite 606
Jacksonville, FL 32209
(904) 244-9643
###
Questions, comments?
If you have questions or comments about this article please contact us. Comments that provide additional related information may be added here by our Editors.
Latest articles: (any category)
Reporting Drug Wastage with Modifier JW and NEW Modifier JZAugust 15th, 2023 - Aimee Wilcox
Modifier JW has been around since 2003 with changes in Medicare policies to ensure standard utilization in 2017; however, because of a continued lack of reporting consistency, Medicare has created and implemented policy related to reporting a new modifier, JZ. How does this impact Medicare reimbursement and why is this modifier so important?
Finding Patterns of Complexity in the Medical Decision Making (MDM) Table August 8th, 2023 - Aimee Wilcox
Changes to the Medical Decision Making (MDM) Table in 2023 reflect the work performed in the facility setting in addition to the work involved in Evaluation and Management (E/M) scoring in other places of service. Taking the time to really look closely at the MDM Table and identify patterns in wording and scoring helps coders to understand scoring in an easier way.
Seven Reasons to Standardize Medical RecordsJuly 18th, 2023 - Aimee Wilcox
The standardization of medical records offers numerous benefits for healthcare systems, providers, and patients. By ensuring interoperability, improved workflows, better patient safety, supporting research endeavors, and optimizing resource allocation, standardized records contribute to improved efficiency, quality of care and especially patient outcomes. Here are seven reasons to standardize medical records.
Advancements in Coding Hospital Observation Care Services in 2023July 4th, 2023 - Aimee Wilcox
Hospitals are increasingly adopting innovative solutions to improve patient care and optimize processes and many of these solutions follow immediately the recent CPT and Medicare coding changes. In 2023 coding of hospital observation care services underwent significant changes enabling healthcare providers to accurately document and bill for the sick or injured patient that requires a higher level of medical services between the emergency room care and hospital admission. This article explores the key changes in coding hospital observation care services and their impact on healthcare delivery.
Be Aware — Emergency Department Visits Under OIG ScrutinyJune 20th, 2023 - Wyn Staheli
Every year the Department of Health & Human Services Office of Inspector General (OIG) creates an official work plan giving everyone a heads up as to what they are going to be reviewing. The 2022 Work Plan stated that they would be reviewing claims for Evaluation & Management services provided in an emergency department (ED) setting.
OIG Audit Reveals Diagnosis Reporting Problems Affecting Risk Adjustment ScoringJune 15th, 2023 - Wyn Staheli
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) recently published their Spring 2023 Semiannual Report to Congress. This report contained some diagnoses reporting issues that all providers need to be aware of. They focused on several groups of diagnoses that they considered “High-Risk” for being miscoded. Several states were included in the report and the types of errors for all can be generally grouped into several categories.
Documenting for Suture and Staple Removal E/M Add-On CodesMay 30th, 2023 - Aimee Wilcox
Historically, the 10-day and 90-day global periods would include the patient's follow-up Evaluation and Management (E/M) services and any dressing changes or staple/suture removal related to the surgery; however, following a closer analysis of these and other surgery codes, the decision was made to make significant revisions to these codes to ensure proper reporting.
