Providers are able to bill Medicare for vaccinations given to patients who are under a hospice election, a reversal of a May 2013 transmittal that issued common working file edits designed to ensure that only the hospice would be able to furnish these vaccinations.
CMS details its reversal in transmittal 1339 to its One-Time Notifications Manual. Both institutional and outpatient providers are impacted.
The agency decided that its initial plan to limit billing for vaccine administrations for patients within a hospice election to the hospice was too strict an interpretation of the Medicare Claims Processing Manual, Chapter 18, Section 10.2.4, which states that vaccinations “may be covered when administered by the hospice.”
Because the language within the manual does not say that these vaccinations are coverable only when administered by the hospice, CMS determined that it overreached in its initial interpretation.
In order to be paid for claims for vaccination administration for patients in a hospice election, the provider is to administer modifier GW (service not related to the hospice patient’s terminal condition).
Medicare Administrative Contractors are instructed to be able to pay for hospice vaccinations done by providers as of April 6. Any claims submitted between Oct. 1, 2013 and April 6 that were not paid may be resubmitted.
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?