Confusion over how to respond to electronic remittance advice (ERA) will hopefully decline in 2014, thanks to efforts from the Council for Affordable Quality Healthcare (CAQH) to streamline and standardize how payers use ERA codes to convey why your claims are being denied or rejected.
These standardization efforts were driven by the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Remittance codes will be divided into these four categories:
1. Additional Information Required – Missing/Invalid/Incomplete Documentation
2. Additional Information Required – Missing/Invalid/Incomplete Data from Submitted Claim
3. Billed Service Not Covered by Health Plan
4. Benefit for Billed Services Not Payable
The efforts at standardization are designed to head off confusion from how different payers are deciding to use electronic remittance advice on claims. The benefit to physician practices is the ability to better understand how to quickly determine the best response to claims denials and rejections.
Underneath the four core reasons why claims aren’t being paid, the CAQH standardization breaks down the remittance advice codes in a standardized way. The changes will be implemented by CMS by Jan. 6, 2014.
For an example of how it works, let’s look at the first scenario from above, Additional Information Required – Missing/Incomplete/Invalid Documentation.
In the first scenario, you’ll see an initial code, in this case Claim Adjustment Reason Code 16: Claim/service lacks information which is needed for adjudication. At least one Remark Code must be provided (may be comprised of either the NCPDP Reject Reason Code, or Remittance Advice Remark Code that is not an ALERT).
The presence of that code limits the remittance advice remark codes (RARCs) that should accompany the claims denial because you are now focused on only denials or claims rejections caused by missing information.
Two examples of RARCs you might see are M47 (Missing/incomplete/invalid internal or document control number, or M51 (Missing/incomplete/invalid procedure). But you wouldn’t see either of those two codes without seeing an initial denial or rejection claim type to help frame your response.
The denial code infrastructure being established by CAQH is a HIPAA standard code set, which should make it easier to determine how to more quickly and effectively address denials in 2014.
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.
CMS pays emergency department visits through a payment method using Ambulatory Payment Classifications (APCs). Most payers also use the APC reimbursement system; however, there may be some differences in payer policies (always review your specific payer policy). APCs are the primary type of payment made under the OPPS, comprising groupings ...
It has been said that the healthcare industry is notoriously slow in terms of technology adoption. One need only look at how convoluted medical coding and billing are to know that it needs a technology injection. Specifically, medical coding and billing software desperately needs artificial intelligence (AI).
Attention providers, suppliers, billers, and vendors who bill Durable Medical Equipment (DME) to Medicare! Currently, a supplier receives a signed Certificate of Medical Necessity (CMN) from the treating physician or creates and signs a DME Information Form (DIFs); these are required to be sent with the claim.
However, this is about ...
Your practice has utilized the same medical billing software for years. The medical billing staff says it is time for a change. You don't necessarily disagree, but you also don't know where to begin your search for new software. There are so many vendors offering so many products that making sense of it all can be challenging.
Each year CMS publishes an Advance Notice of the upcoming years Medicare Advantage (MA) Capitation Rates and Part C and Part D Payment Policies and asks for comments related to it. Each of the comments are carefully reviewed and responded to and often are impactful to changes seen between the Advance Notice and final publication referred to as the Rate Announcement. With health equity as a primary focus for 2023, CMS announced some policy changes that may impact your organization.
Medicare Advantage Organizations (MAOs) have gone back and forth on whether or not to use data collected from telehealth, virtual Care, and telephone (audio-only) encounters with Medicare beneficiaries for risk adjustment reporting, but the following published documents from CMS cleared that up once and for all by providing an answer to a question specifically related to this question.
We’ve seen a number of OIG risk adjustment data validation (RADV) audits recently where the independent review contractor was simply looking for any codes the payer reported that were not supported by the documentation, in an effort to declare an overpayment was made and monies are due to be repaid. However, it was refreshing to read this RADV audit and discover that the independent review contractor actually identified HCCs the payer failed to report that, while still resulting in an overpayment, was able to reduce the overpayment by giving credit for these additional HCCs. What lessons are you learning from reading these RADV audit reports?