Knowledge Base Category -

“Mortality rates from sepsis are higher than heart attack, stroke, or trauma. Sepsis needs to be viewed with the same urgency as these other life-threatening conditions because we know early treatment can decrease mortality.”- Craig M. Coopersmith, MD, FCCM, Task Force Member and Immediate Past President of the Society for Critical Care Medicine (SCCM)

On February 22, 2016 the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3) was released at SCCM’s 45th Critical Care Congress. The new recommendations are the result of extensive efforts by a Task Force of 19 leaders in the field of sepsis that was convened by the SCCM and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM). According to the SCCM announcement “the group’s recommendations have been endorsed by more than 30 medical societies from six continents, spanning disciplines from critical care and emergency medicine to infectious disease and family practice.”

Sepsis-3 Definitions

The Sepsis-3 definitions were published in the February 2016 issue of the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA). “The task force recommended that its report be designated “Sepsis-3,” recognizing the two iterations to define sepsis (1991 and 2001) and signaling the need for future study.”  

Sepsis is now defined as “life threatening organ dysfunction due to a dysregulated host in response to infection.”

SOFA (Sequential [Sepsis-related] Organ Failure Assessment) is a tool to be used to clinically characterize the septic patient.

qSOFA (quick Sequential [Sepsis-Related] Organ Failure Assessment) is a new diagnostic tool that clinicians can conduct for patients outside a hospital, in an Emergency Department or General Hospital floor setting to identify patients at risk for sepsis. The three warning signs to assess for are:

• An alteration in mental status,
• A decrease in systolic blood pressure of less than 100mm Hg; and
• A respiration rate greater than 22 breaths/min.

Two or more of the warning signs increases the risk of a hospitalized patient having a longer length of stay in an ICU or to die in the hospital.

The task force stresses that SOFA and qSOFA are not intended to be used as a “stand alone definition of sepsis.”

Septic Shock is now defined as “a subset of sepsis in which particularly profound circulatory, cellular, and metabolic abnormalities substantially increase mortality.” The task force identified the following two new criteria for diagnosing septic shock:

• “Persisting hypotension requiring vasopressors to maintain MAP ≥65 mm Hg;” and
• “Blood lactate level ≥2 mmol/L despite adequate volume resuscitation.”

Sepsis (lay definition) the recently published definition that “sepsis is a life-threatening condition that arises when the body’s response to infection injures its own tissues,” was endorsed by the task force as it is consistent with the new Sepsis-3 definition.

Severe Sepsis was deemed “redundant” by the task force, “as sepsis has a mortality rate of 10 percent or higher, making the condition already severe.”

Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (SIRS) “The current use of 2 or more SIRS criteria to identify sepsis was unanimously considered by the task force to be unhelpful.”

While SIRS due to a localized infection can no longer be coded as sepsis in ICD-10, Coding and CDI Professionals need to be mindful that at this time the code set definitions of sepsis and severe sepsis remain the same.

The Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model (CJR) is set to begin in just thirty days on April 1, 2016. For the first time, hospitals paid under the Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS) in select Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) are required to participate in this model, with limited exceptions. Medicare beneficiaries electing to undergo any lower extremity joint procedure that is assigned to MS-DRG 469 or 470 will be included in this model.

CMS released Change Request (CR) 9533 on February 19th and related MLN Matters® article MM9533. Both are aimed at Provider Education with emphasis on the need for Providers to make sure that billing staff is aware of the changes.  

Demonstration Code 75

CMS will automatically apply the CJR Demonstration Code 75 to claims that meet criteria for inclusion in this project. Medicare beneficiaries to be included in this model must meet the following criteria:

• Enrollment in Medicare Part A and Part B;
• Medicare eligibility is not based on the End-Stage Renal Disease benefit;
• Not being enrolled in any managed care plan;
• Not being covered under a United Mine Workers of America health plan; and
• Medicare is the primary payer.

CMS notes that, if at any time during the episode the beneficiary no longer meets all of these criteria, the episode is cancelled.

CMS instructs that they will automatically apply Demonstration Code 75 when the inclusion criteria are met and that “participant hospitals need not include demonstration code 75 on their claims.” They go on to note that instructions for submission of claims for Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) services will be communicated when the waiver of the three-day stay requirement is operationalized.

Billing and Paying for Post-Discharge Home Visits

In the CJR Final Rule, CMS finalized their proposal “to waive the “incident to” direct physician supervision requirement set forth at §410.26(b) (5), to allow a CJR beneficiary who does not qualify for home health services to receive up to 9 post-discharge visits in his or her home or place of residence any time during the episode following discharge from an anchor hospitalization.”

This service will be billed under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) with a HCPCS G-Code (G9490). This G-Code will be payable for CJR model beneficiaries beginning April 1, 2016. “Claims submitted for post-discharge home visits for the CJR model will be accepted only when the claim contains the CJR specific HCPCS G-Code. Although CMS is associating the Demonstration Code 75 with the CJR initiative, no demonstration code is needed or required on Part B claims submitted with the post-discharge home visit HCPCS G-Code.

Additional information on billing and payment for the post-discharge home visit HCPCS G-Code will be available in the April 2016 release of the MPFS Recurring Update. Future updates to the relative value units (RVUs) and payment for this HCPCS code will be included in the MPFS final rules and recurring updates each year.”

Billing and Payment for Telehealth Services

CMS also finalized to waive the geographic site requirement and the originating site requirement to permit telehealth visits to originate in the beneficiary’s home or place of residence. Waiver of the telehealth requirements will be subject to certain conditions that have been detailed in CR 9533 and MLN MM9533.

As with the Post-Discharge Home Visits, Telehealth Services will also be billed under the MPFS using one of nine HCPCS G-codes (G9481, G9482, G9483, G9484, G9485, G9486, G9487, G9488, and G9499). Attachment A of CR 9533 provides the long descriptors of these codes. These codes will also be payable beginning April 1, 2016.

“Claims submitted for telehealth home visits for the CJR model will be accepted only when the claim contains one of nine of the CJR specific HCPCS G-Code.” Similar to guidance for post-discharge home visits, no demonstration code is needed or required on Part B claims submitted with a post discharge telehealth visit HCPCS G-code. “Additional information on billing and payment for the telehealth home visit HCPCS G-Codes will be available in the April 2016 release of the MPFS Recurring Update. Future updates to the RVUs and payment for these HCPCS codes will be included in the MPFS final rules and recurring updates each year.”

This model is set to run for five years, ending December 31, 2020. Hospitals, providers and suppliers will continue to be paid as usual. At the end of each Performance Year, Medicare will reconcile claims paid and hospitals will receive a reconciliation payment or be responsible for repayment to Medicare depending on how actual spending compared to an established target price. Additional information about the CJR model can be found in a related article, Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Model Finalized or by visiting the CMS CJR Model web page.

Medicare transmittals from February include four transmittals based on updates to National Coverage Determinations (NCDs). As a reminder, the NCD process is described in the Medicare Program Integrity Manual, chapter 13.

National Coverage Determinations (NCDs) are developed by CMS and outline the conditions for which an item or service is considered to be covered (or not covered) by Medicare nationally. Initially a decision memorandum is posted on the CMS Web site that describes the clinical position which CMS intends to implement. CMS implements the coverage decision through transmittals generally within 180 days of the end of the calendar quarter in which the memo was posted. Implementation often includes both an update to the NCD manual and the Claims Processing Manual to provide claims processing instructions related to the new coverage requirements.

Such is the case for the February updates with a new NCD for human Papillomavirus (HPV) and a revision to the NCD for Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV).

February 2016 Transmittals

Screening for Cervical Cancer with Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Testing – National Coverage Determination (NCD)

• Numbers:Transmittal R189NCD, Transmittal R3460CP, Change Request 9434,MLN Matters MM9434
• Dates:Issued: February 5, 2016; Effective: July 9, 2015; MLN: February 18,2016;   Implementation: January 3, 2017
• Affects: Physicians and other providers who submit claims to Medicare Administrative Contractors
• Updates: National Coverage Determinations Manual, Chapter 1, Section 210.2.1; Medicare Claims Processing Manual, Chapter 18, Sections 30.2.1, 30.5, 30.6, 30.7, 30.8, and 30.9

Summary of Changes: The purpose of this Change Request (CR) is that CMS has determined that for dates of service on or after effective July 9, 2015, evidence is sufficient to add HPV testing under specified conditions.

Screening for the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Infection

• Numbers: Transmittal R190NCD; Transmittal R3461CP, Change Request 9403, MLN Matters MM9403
• Dates: Issued: February 5, 2016; Effective: April 13, 2015; MLN: February 17, 2016; Implementation: January 3, 2017
• Affects: Physicians, other providers, and suppliers who submit claims to Medicare Administrative Contractors
• Updates: National Coverage Determinations Manual, Chapter 1, Section 210.7; Medicare Claims Processing Manual, Chapter 18, Sections 130.1, 130.2, 130.3, 130.4, 130.5 and 130.6

Summary of Changes: The purpose of this CR is to inform MACs that CMS has determined that the evidence is adequate to conclude that screening of HIV infection for all individuals between the ages of 15-65 years is reasonable and necessary for early detection of HIV and is appropriate for individuals entitled to benefits under Part A or enrolled in Part B.

“Quality is never an accident; it is always the result of high intention, sincere effort, intelligent direction and skillful execution; it represents the wise choice of many alternatives.”- William A. Foster

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) began releasing Hospital Medicare Compliance Review (Compliance Reviews) Reports in early 2011. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Compliance Reviews became part of the OIG’s Work Plan. Although the name of the project may have changed since 2012, Compliance Reviews remain a part of the Work Plan in FY 2016.

FY 2012 OIG Work Plan Project

• Medicare Inpatient and Outpatient Payments to Acute Care Hospitals (New)

We will review Medicare payments to hospitals to determine compliance with selected billing requirements. We will use the results of these reviews to recommend recovery of overpayments and identify providers that routinely submit improper claims. Prior OIG audits, investigations, and inspections have identified areas that are at risk for noncompliance with Medicare billing requirements. Based on computer matching and data mining techniques, we will select hospitals for focused reviews of claims that may be at risk for overpayments. Using the same data analysis techniques, we will identify hospitals that broadly rank as least risky across compliance areas and those that broadly rank as most risky. We will then review the hospitals’ policies and procedures to compare the compliance practices of these two groups of hospitals. We will also survey or interview hospitals’ leadership and compliance officers to provide contextual information related to hospitals’ compliance programs. (OAS; W-00-11-35538; various reviews; expected issue date: FY 2012; work in progress; and OEI; 00-00-00000; expected issue date: FY 2012; new start)

FY 2016 OIG Work Plan Project

• Selected inpatient and outpatient billing requirements

We will review Medicare payments to acute care hospitals to determine hospitals’ compliance with selected billing requirements and recommend recovery of overpayments. Prior OIG audits, investigations, and inspections have identified areas at risk for noncompliance with Medicare billing requirements. Our review will focus on those hospitals with claims that may be at risk for overpayments. (OAS; W-00-12-35538; W-00-13-35538; W-00-14-35538; W-00-15-35538; various reviews; expected issue date: FY 2016)

Compliance Reviews by the Numbers

As of February 2016, the OIG has released over 140 Compliance Reviews. According to these reviews, collectively this group of hospitals was overpaid $76,447,380.00. Adding insult to injury, in 2013 the OIG began extrapolating their findings. To date, 21 hospitals have been subject to extrapolation, including the most recent hospital Compliance Review released on February 3, 2016 for the University of Minnesota Medical Center for 2012 and 2013.

Extrapolating overpayments has exponentially increased the amount hospitals are to refund to the Contractor. Collectively, the $7,780,049.00 overpaid by 21 hospitals was extrapolated to $66,495,541.00. When you add this subset of hospitals to the overall amounts, the $76,447,380.00 that all hospitals were overpaid increased to $135,262,862.00 to be refunded to the Contractor. Now let’s take a closer look at the most recent Report released.

Medicare Compliance Review of University of Minnesota Medical Center for 2012 and 2013

The objective of this review was to “determine whether University of Minnesota Medical Center (the Hospital) complied with Medicare requirements for billing inpatient and outpatient services on selected types of claims.”

Audit Scope

This Compliance Review covered $24,360,864 in Medicare payments to the hospital for 3,351 claims potentially at risk for billing errors. The OIG selected a stratified random sample of 255 claims with payments totally $2,370,592. Claims consisted of 75 inpatient and 180 outpatient claims with dates of service in Calendar Year 2012 and 2013.

Risk Areas

Specific “risk areas” identified as being at risk for noncompliance with Medicare billing requirements included:

• Inpatient Rehabilitation Claims,
• Inpatient claims billed with high-severity-level DRG codes,
• Inpatient and Outpatient manufacturer credits for replaced medical devices,
• Outpatient dental claims,
• Outpatient claims billed with modifier -59,
• Outpatient claims billed for Doxorubicin Hydrochloride; and
• Outpatient claims billed for Herceptin.

Note that manufacturer credits for replaced medical devices and outpatient dental claims are also stand-alone projects within the FY 2016 Work Plan. This should be a red flag for hospitals to make sure you are in compliance with these two “risk areas.” A valuable resource is readily available in the specific findings in the report where the OIG provides references such as the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) and the CMS Provider Reimbursement Manual (PRM) as guidance for compliance with billing requirements.

Audit Findings

The Hospital complied with Medicare billing requirements for 125 of the 255 inpatient and outpatient claims reviewed. The remaining 130 claims resulted in overpayments of $565,286, specifically:

• 29 Inpatient claims had billing errors, resulting in overpayments of $261,886, and
• 101 Outpatient claims had billing errors, resulting in overpayments of $303,400.

The OIG indicated that “these errors occurred primarily because the Hospital did not have adequate controls to prevent the incorrect billing of Medicare claims within the selected risk areas that contained errors.” On the basis of this sample, the OIG extrapolated that the hospital received overpayments of at least $3,266,841 for the audit period and recommended that the Hospital refund this amount to the Medicare contractor.

Looking at the dollars to be refunded, it is easy to see why Compliance Reviews continue to be a part of the OIG’s annual Work Plan. While Compliance Reviews are a part of the OIG Work Plan, hospitals should consider closely monitoring “risk areas” in these reports as an additional tool in your annual and ongoing compliance assessment, plan and actions.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) posted an update to the Therapy Cap webpage on February 9, 2016. CMS indicates that the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA), signed into law on April 16, 2015 impacted Therapy Caps by extending the “exception process” and making changes to the manual medical review process.

Therapy Cap Exception Process Extension

Therapy caps are a financial limitation on the amount Medicare allows for outpatient therapy services for a single Medicare patient in a given calendar year. The therapy cap amount for each patient starts over each January 1st. The therapy caps for Calendar Year 2016 are $1,960 for Physical Therapy (PT) and Speech-Language Pathology (SLP) combined and $1,960 for Occupational Therapy (OT).

An exception process to the therapy caps for reasonable and necessary services beyond the cap was initially required by section 5107 of the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. Congress has continuously extended the exception process through legislation. The most recent extension can be found in section 202 of MACRA that extended the therapy caps exception through December 31, 2017.

Manual Medical Review of Therapy Claims

Along with the ability for a provider to receive money beyond the therapy caps came the manual medical review of the claims to ensure that Medicare dollars were being spent appropriately. Initially, the Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) conducted pre-payment reviews with dates of service January 1, 2013 to March 31, 2013. The Recovery Auditors assumed responsibility for reviews on April 1, 2013.

MACRA included key changes to this process. First, it shifted the review requirement from ALL records to a “targeted review process.” Second, it prohibits the continued use of Recovery Auditors to conduct the review.

“CMS has tasked Strategic Health Solutions as the Supplemental Medical Review Contractor (SMRC) with performing this medical review on a post-payment basis.

CMS indicates that claims selection will be based on:

• Providers with a high percentage of patients receiving therapy beyond the threshold as compared to their peers during the first year of MACRA.
• Therapy provided in skilled nursing facilities (SNFs), therapists in private practice, and outpatient physical therapy or speech-language pathology providers (OPTs) or other rehabilitation providers.”

This medical review process will be paying close attention to evaluating the number of units/hours of therapy provided in a day.”

Information about the number of units/hours of therapy provided in a day can be found in a related article Rehabilitation Therapy Documentation, Part 2.

Resources for More Information

Therapy Caps has been a “hot topic” for several years now. Additional articles on therapy caps/manual review can be accessed on our website – just use the subject search function with subject “therapy”.

In addition to the CMS Therapy Cap web page there is also a Therapy Services webpage, which includes links to the Medicare Manual sections that address rehabilitation therapy services as well as a link to the Beneficiary Fact Sheet Medicare Limits on Therapy Services.

Last, we strongly encourage you to visit the Strategic Health Solutions, LLC website at http://strategichs.com/smrc/ to view their prior reviews of Medicare Part B Outpatient Rehabilitation Therapy Services found on their Completed Projects webpage. Pay close attention to the “Denial Reasons” and “How to Prevent Denial” sections of the Project detail.

Did you know that Section 6401 of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) provides that a “provider of medical or other items or services or supplier within a particular industry sector or category” shall establish a compliance program as a condition of enrollment in Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP)? Although an enforcement date has yet to be issued, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), in consultation with the HHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) have established seven core or key elements of an effective compliance program as required by the ACA.

The 5th core element is Auditing and Monitoring. CMS indicated in an Affordable Care Act Provider Compliance Programs: Getting Started Webinar that “a system for auditing and monitoring must be implemented to measure the effectiveness of the compliance program, ensure compliance with CMS requirements, and identify compliance risks.”

Ensuring compliance with CMS requirements is a full time job in and of itself and we recognize that our clients are busier than ever. As Making HealthCare Make Sense is what we are about, we have added a standing article the last week of each month spotlighting key Medicare Transmittals released by CMS during the month.

January 2016 Transmittals

January 2016 Integrated Outpatient Code Editor (I/OCE) Specifications Version 17.0

• Numbers: Transmittal R3437CP, Change Request 9459, MLN Matters MM9459
• Dates: Issued: 01/06/2016, MLN: 1/11/2016, Implementation: 1/4/2016
• Affects: Providers who submit claims to Medicare Administrative Contractors, including Home Health and Hospice MACs (HH+H MACs) for services provided to Medicare beneficiaries
• Updates: Medicare Claims Processing Manual, Chapter 4, Section 40.1

Summary of Changes: This notification provides the Integrated OCE instructions and specifications for the Integrated OCE that will be utilized under the OPPS and Non-OPPS for hospital outpatient departments, community mental health centers, all non-OPPS providers, and for limited services when provided in a home health agency not under the Home Health Prospective Payment System or to a hospice patient for the treatment of a non-terminal illness.

Notice of New Interest Rate for Medicare Overpayments and Underpayments -2nd Qtr Notification for FY 2016

• Numbers: Transmittal R258FM, Change Request 9532, MLN not released at time of this article
• Dates: Issued: 01/12/2016, Implementation 01/19/2016
• Affects: Medicare Providers
• Updates: Medicare Financial Management Manual, Chapter 3, Section 10

Summary of Changes: Medicare Regulation 42 CFR Section 405.378 provides for the charging and payment of interest on overpayments and underpayments to Medicare providers. The Secretary of Treasury certifies an interest rate quarterly. Treasury utilized the most comprehensive data available on consumer interest rates to determine the certified rate. Interest is assessed on delinquent debts in order to protect the Medicare Trust Funds.

Award of Durable Medical Equipment (DME) Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC) Contract for Jurisdiction D

• Numbers: Transmittal R1592OTN, Change Request 9453, MLN not released at time of this article
• Dates: Issued: 01/15/2016, Implementation: 03/01/2016
• Affects: Providers submitting DME claims for Medicare beneficiaries inJurisdiction D (U.S. Territories of Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, Wyoming, American Samoa, Guam, and Norther Mariana Islands.
• Summary of Changes: The purpose of this change request is to announce the award of the Durable Medical Equipment (DME) Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC) Jurisdiction D contract to Noridian Healthcare Solutions, LLC for the administration of Medicare DME Fee-for-Service (FFS) claims.

Medicare covers a growing number of preventive services. Excellent resources to learn about Medicare’s Preventive services include a Medicare booklet and website for beneficiaries and a Preventive Services Chart and the Medicare manuals (Claims Processing Manual, Chapter 18, Benefit Policy Manual, Chapter 15, and NCD Manual, Chapter 1, Part 4) for providers. One such screening benefit is screening for colorectal cancer. Medicare covers fecal-occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, colonoscopy, barium enemas, and most recently Cologuard™ - A Multitarget Stool DNA Test for colorectal cancer screening. There are frequency and diagnosis limitations so read the coverage requirements carefully.

This year there is a new procedure code for Cologuard. See the update to MLN Matters Article MM9115. The previous HCPCS code, G0464, (Colorectal cancer screening; stool-based DNA and fecal occult hemoglobin (for example, KRAS, NDRG4 and BMP3)) expired effective December 31, 2015 and is replaced with CPT code 81528 for dates of service on and after January 1, 2016.

As a review, Medicare covers Cologuard sDNA testing:

• Effective for dates of service on and after October 9, 2014
• Once every three years for
• Asymptomatic Medicare patients
• Between the ages of 50-85 years
• At average risk of developing colorectal cancer
• For hospital outpatients (types of bill 13x, 14x, and 85x)
• With ICD-9 diagnosis codes V76.41 and V76.51 on the claim prior to October 1, 2015 and ICD-10 diagnosis codes Z12.12 and Z12.11 on the claim for October 1, 2015 and after
• With HCPCS code G0464 for October 9, 2014 through December 31, 2015 and for CPT code 81528 for January 1, 2016 and after
• There is no coinsurance or deductible for this test

Other coverage updates from last month are listed below. Notice that yet another Medicare Administrative Contractor (NGS) has published a new policy on urine drug testing.

For those of you that do not live in the state of Alabama it is hard to comprehend just how big college football is in this state. When I was new to the state one of the first questions people would ask is “which team are you for?” As a transplant from “up north,” (Tennessee), the obvious answer for me was neither.

In the world of Medicare and Acute Care Hospitals one main question that keeps being asked is, “are you an inpatient or an outpatient.” And for the Medicare beneficiary that has spent zero or one midnight in a hospital bed, though the answer will ultimately be inpatient or outpatient, it is not always an obvious answer.

The Comprehensive Error Rate Testing (CERT) Program is used to calculate the improper payment estimate for the Medicare Fee-for-Service Program. Each November, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) publishes the improper payment rate in the Agency Financial Report at www.hhs.gov/afr. CMS later publishes more detailed information in an annual Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) Improper Payments Report and Appendices. This article will focus on why patient status for zero and one day lengths of stay remains a focus, who is keeping a close eye on this dilemma and resources for you to help assess this patient population in your hospital.

Why Zero and One Day Inpatient Lengths of Stay Continues to be a Focus?

“Are you and Inpatient or Outpatient” still being a question for zero and 1 midnight hospitalizations is best demonstrated in the Appendices table Projected Improper Payments by Length of Stay. This table was new to the Appendices in 2014 and again appears in the 2015 report. Depicted below is a compare of data from the 2014 table and 2015 table. While the improper payment rate dropped 9.3% it is this group of claims that continue to have the highest error ate.

 

Table 1: “Projected Improper Payments by Length of Stay” 2014 to 2015 Compare

‍Who is Monitoring for Compliance with Patient Status Assignment?

Beneficiary and Family Centered Care (BFCC) QIOs and Recovery Auditors

HHS indicated in the FY 2015 Agency Financial Report that they are committed to reducing improper payments in the Medicare FFS program. One of the five corrective actions they believe will have a considerable effect in preventing and reducing improper payments is the update to the “Two Midnight” rule in the CY 2016 OPPS Final Rule. At the same time they announced the following two changes in their education and enforcement strategies.

• “Beginning on October 1, 2015, the Quality Improvement Organizations (QIOs) assumed responsibility to conduct initial patient status review of providers to determine the appropriateness of Part A payment for short stay inpatient hospital claims. From October 1, 2015 through December 31, 2015, short stay inpatient hospital reviews conducted by the QIOs will be based on Medicare’s current payment policies.
• Beginning on January 1, 2016, QIOs and Recovery Audit Contractors (RACs) will conduct patient status reviews in accordance with policy changes finalized in the Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System rule (CMS-1613-P) and effective in calendar year 2016. Effective January 1, 2016, RACs may conduct patient status reviews only for those providers that have been referred by the QIO as exhibiting persistent noncompliance with Medicare payment policies.”

To learn more about the transition of patient status reviews, you can:

• Read a related article at http://www.mmplusinc.com/news-articles/item/two-midnight-rule-once-again-to-be-or-not-to-be;or
• Join us for our 2016 Medicare Updates Webinar tomorrow afternoon.

Office of Inspector General

• FY 2014 and 2015 Work Plans: Inpatient Admission Criteria (OEI; 00-00-00000)

With the implementation of the “Two Midnight” Rule, the OIG added new inpatient admission criteria to the Work Plan in FY 2014 and 2015. This issue was focused on determining the impact of the new admission criteria on hospital billing, Medicare payments, and beneficiary payments. It also was focused on determining how billing varied among hospitals in FY 2014. This focus was based on the fact that “previous OIG work identified millions of dollars in overpayments to hospitals for short inpatient stays that should have been billed as outpatient stays. Beginning in FY 2014, new criteria state that physicians should admit for inpatient care those beneficiaries who are expected to need at least 2 nights of hospital care (known as the “two midnight policy””). Beneficiaries whose care is expected to last fewer than 2 nights should be treated as outpatients. The criteria represent a substantial change in the way hospitals bill for inpatient and outpatient stays.”

• FY 2016 Work Plan: Hospitals’ use of outpatient and inpatient stays under Medicare’s two-midnight rule (OEI; 02-15-00020)

With hospitals now entering into their third fiscal year under the “Two Midnight” Policy, as part of the FY 2016 Work Plan the OIG will “determine how hospitals’ use of outpatient and inpatient stays changed under Medicare’s two-midnight rule, as well as how Medicare and beneficiary payments for these stays changed, by comparing claims for hospital stays in the year prior to the effective date of the two-midnight rule to stays in the year following the effective date of that rule. We will also determine the extent to which the use of outpatient and inpatient stays varied among hospitals. CMS implemented the two-midnight rule on October 1, 2013. This rule represents a substantial change to the criteria that hospital physicians are expected to use when deciding whether to admit beneficiaries as inpatients or treat them as outpatients.”

Hospital Zero and One Day Inpatient Stay Volume

The CERT, OIG, BFCC-QIOs and potentially the Recovery Auditors are monitoring hospital’s compliance with the “Two-Midnight” policy by auditing zero and one midnight inpatient claims. But, do you know how this specific patient volume has changed where you work?

PEPPER Report

One source available to IPPS Participating Hospitals is the Program for Evaluating Payment Patterns Electronic Report (PEPPER). In the PEPPER User’s Guide, the OIG encourages hospitals to develop and implement a compliance program and conduct regular audits as a part of this program to ensure charges for Medicare services have been correctly documented and billed. They note that the PEPPER “can help guide the hospital’s auditing and monitoring activities.”

This report focuses on Medicare severity diagnosis related groups (DRGs) and discharges at risk for improper payment due to billing, coding and/or admission necessity.” One-day and Same-day Stays for Medical and Surgical DRGs are target areas in the report. A hospital is compared to its state, Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC) Jurisdiction and the Nation for each target area.

The tables below compare the Nationals, J-J MAC Jurisdiction (Alabama, Georgia and Tennessee) and Alabama’s 80th Percentile for the 3rd quarter (April – June) of the Fiscal Year prior to implementation of the “Two-Midnight” Policy (2013), one year after implementation (2014) and the most current 3rd quarter fiscal year data (2015).

 

The PEPPER provides the following suggested interventions for Hospitals that are High Outliers:

“This could indicate that there are unnecessary admissions related to inappropriate use of admission screening criteria or outpatient observation. A sample of same- and/or one-day stay cases should be reviewed to determine if inpatient admission was necessary or if care could have been provided more efficiently on an outpatient basis (e.g., outpatient observation). Hospitals may generate data profiles to identify same- and/or one-day stays sorted by DRG, physician or admission source to assist in identification of any patterns related to same- and/or one-day stays. Hospitals may also wish to identify whether patients admitted for same- and/or one- day stays were treated in outpatient, outpatient observation or the emergency department for one or more nights prior to the inpatient admission. Hospitals should not review same- and/or one- day stays that are associated with procedures designated by CMS as “inpatient only.”

RealTime Medicare Data

Another source that can assist you is our sister company RealTime Medicare Data (RTMD). RTMD collects over 680 million Medicare claims annually from 23 states and the District of Columbia, and allows for searching of over 5.1 billion historical claims. In response to the “Two-Midnight” Policy, RTMD has available in their suite of Inpatient Hospital reports a One Day Stay Report. This report enables a hospital to view one day stay paid claims data by DRG and Physician to direct where audits should be focused. For further information on all that RTMD has to offer you can visit their website at www.rtmd.org.

 

Resources

Department of Health and Human Services Fiscal Year 2015 Agency Financial Report: http://www.hhs.gov/afr/fy-2015-hhs-agency-financial-report.pdf

The Supplementary Appendices for the Medicare Fee-for-Services 2015 Improper Payments Report: https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Monitoring-Programs/Medicare-FFS-Compliance-Programs/CERT/CERT-Reports-Items/Downloads/AppendicesMedicareFee-for-Service2015ImproperPaymentsReport.pdf

FY 2016 OIG Work Plan: http://oig.hhs.gov/reports-and-publications/archives/workplan/2016/oig-work-plan-2016.pdf

Short-term Acute Care Program for Evaluating Payment Patterns Electronic Report User’s Guide 18th Edition: https://www.pepperresources.org/Portals/0/Documents/PEPPER/ST/STPEPPERUsersGuide_Edition18.pdf

With the New Year looming, it is hard to believe that is has almost been a year since the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced for the first time in the history of the Medicare program explicit goals for alternative payment models and value-based payments.

Alternative Payment Model Goals

By the end of 2016 have 30% of Medicare payments in alternative payment models.

By the end of 2018 have 50% of Medicare payments in alternative payment models.

Value Based Payment Goals

By 2016 have 85% of Medicare fee-for-service payments tied to quality of value.

By 2018 have 90% of Medicare fee-for-service payments tied to quality of value.

On November 25th, Patrick Conway, M.D., MSc, Acting Deputy Administrator and Chief Medical Officer, CMS announced in The CMS Blog an updated 2016 HHS National Quality Strategy (NQS) indicating that “the main purposes of the 2016 CMS Quality Strategy update are to achieve the broad aims of the NQS and to apply the Administration’s strategy for shifting Medicare payments from volume to value.”

National Quality Strategy: By the Numbers

Three Aims

1. Better Care
2. Healthier People, Healthier Communities
3. Smarter Spending

Six Priorities

1. Make Care Safer by Reducing Harm Caused in the Delivery System
2. Strengthen Person and Family Engagement as Partners in their Care
3. Promote Effective Communication and Coordination of Care
4. Promote Effective Prevention and Treatment of Chronic Disease
5. Work with Communities to Promote Best Practices of Health Living
6. Make Care Affordable

Four Foundational Principles

1. Eliminating racial and ethnic disparities,
2. Strengthening infrastructure and data systems across all settings of care,
3. Enabling local innovations, and
4. Fostering learning organizations.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has made the six priorities goals in the CMS Quality Strategy. They identified the Four Foundational Principles to help guide their action towards meeting these goals and believe that incorporating these “will drive change to improve quality and cost of care for all. “

CMS Quality Strategy Goals: A Call to Action

To advance the three aims, the CMS Quality Strategy Goals reflect the six priorities for the NQS. There are innumerable activities being implemented to achieve this vision. The remainder of this article will provide you a glimpse of what is being done to achieve each of these Goals.

Goal 1: Making Care Safer by Reducing Harm Caused in the Delivery System

Hospital-Acquired Conditions (HACs)

On December 3rd the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) announced that data from the recent report Saving Lives and Saving Money: Hospital-Acquired Conditions Update Interim Data from National Efforts to Make Care Safer, 2010-2014 shows between 2010 and 2014:

• An estimated 87,000 fewer patients died from a HAC,
• The overall incidence of HACs has been reduced by 2.1 million for an estimated savings of $19.8 billion; and
• In 2014 alone, 37,000 fewer patients died than would have died if the rate of adverse events had remained at the 2010 level. Most of the deaths averted resulted from a reduction in rates of pressure ulcers and adverse drug events (ADEs).

HAC Reduction Program

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) established the HAC Reduction Program as an incentive for hospitals to reduce HACs. CMS released the FY 2016 results for the Program on December 10th and they estimate that the total savings in FY 2016 will be $364 million.

Nationwide 758 out of 3,308 eligible hospitals are in the worst performing quartile and will have a one percent payment reduction applied to all Medicare discharges occurring between October 1, 2015 and September 30, 2016. The number of hospitals being penalized is up from the 724 hospitals subject to a payment reduction in FY 2015.

In the FY 2016 HAC Reduction Program, hospitals with a Total HAC Score greater than 6.7500 are subject to a payment reduction. You can find your hospital Total HAC Score at https://www.medicare.gov/hospitalcompare/HAC-reduction-program.html.

Goal 2: Strengthen Person and Family Engagement as Partners in their Care

Everyone with Diabetes Counts (EDC) Program

The Quality Innovation Network Quality Improvement Organizations (QIN-QIOs) are administering the EDC Program. This program offers evidence-based diabetes self-management training and is designed to improve health outcomes and quality of life among disparate and underserved Medicare populations.

Goal 3: Promote Effective Communication and Coordination of Care

CMS cites strengthening the hospital Conditions of Participation (CoP) for Discharge Planning and Bundled Payment Initiatives as two examples to further this goal.

Discharge Planning CoP

On October 29, 2015 CMS announced proposed revisions to the discharge planning requirements that hospitals, including long-term care hospitals (LTCHs), Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities (IRFs), Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs), and Home Health (HH) agencies must meet in order to participate in the Medicare and Medicaid program. They are currently soliciting comments from the healthcare community. You can read more about this in a related article at http://www.mmplusinc.com/news-articles/item/october-29-2015-cms-releases-a-discharge-planning-proposed-rule.

Bundled Payment Initiatives

CMS recently finalized the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) Model which is set to begin on April 1, 2016 and run through December 31, 2020. CMS expects this model to result in $343 million in savings to Medicare over the 5 performance years. Notable about this model is that for the first time, selected hospitals are required to participate. You can read more about this in a related article at http://www.mmplusinc.com/news-articles/item/comprehensive-care-for-joint-replacement-model-finalized.

Goal 4: Promote Effective Prevention and Treatment of Chronic Disease

CMS indicates that more than 133 million Americans report at least one chronic condition, while many have multiple chronic conditions (MCC) affecting them at the same time. For example a person with diabetes and heart disease has multiple chronic conditions.

Million Hearts® Initiative

CMS cites being a lead partner in the Million Hearts® Initiative as one way they are promoting effective prevention and treatment of chronic disease. This initiative seeks to reduce the incidence of heart attacks and strokes by 1 million by 2017. The Million Hearts® website provides educational material for you and your patients, access to data and research, proven techniques to prevent and treat heart attack and stroke and education regarding risks, costs and consequences and ways to prevent heart disease and strokes.

Goal 5: Work with Communities to Promote Best Practices of Health Living

CMS is committed to partnering with key stakeholders to link Medicare, Medicaid, and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) beneficiaries, and the providers that serve them, with communities and resources that support good health. One specific federal effort cited by CMS is the WIC Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program (FMNP)

The FMNP is associated with the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) and was established by Congress in 1992 “to provide fresh, unprepared, locally grown fruits and vegetables to WIC participants, and to expand the awareness, use of, and sales at farmers’ markets.”

Goal 6: Make Care Affordable

Hospital Value Based Purchasing Program

This program adjusts hospital payments for inpatient services based on hospitals’ performance on measures that fall into a number of domains. For FY 2016 this program is funded by a 1.75% reduction from participating hospitals’ base operating diagnosis-related group (DRG) payments. The resulting funds are redistributed to hospitals based on their Total Performance Score (TPS).

CMS added the following measures for Fiscal Year (FY) 2016:

• IMM-2, Influenza Immunization (Clinical Process of Care domain)
• CAUTI, Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection (Outcome domain)
• SSI, Surgical Site Infection Colon Surgery & Abdominal Hysterectomy (Outcome domain)

For those interested in learning more, CMS held a National Provider call on May 12, 2015 to provide an overview of all Hospital Inpatient Quality Reporting and Value-Based Purchasing Programs. Slides, an audio recording and written transcript are available on the CMS website.

One last valuable resource to find out “where we are now” is the CMS Innovation Center. The Innovation Center has a growing portfolio testing various payment and service delivery models that aim to achieve better care for patients, better health for our communities, and lower costs through improvement for our health care system. I encourage you to visit their website to find out where and what Innovation is happening in your state.

“He’s making a list and he’s checking it twice.” Are you a list maker like Santa? If so, you probably have more lists at this time of the year than usual – gift lists, shopping lists, decorating to-do lists, and family/social gatherings lists. Can you handle one more list? There is a list of requirements and information for Medicare coverage of lung cancer screening by Low Dose CT.

Medicare recently added a new preventive service for Medicare beneficiaries through the National Coverage Determination (NCD) process that allows coverage of additional preventive services that are reasonable and necessary for the prevention or early detection of illness or disability. Medicare now covers lung cancer screening by Low Dose Computed Tomography (LDCT). This is an important preventive service since lung cancer was expected to claim over 158,000 lives in the United States in 2015.

A new HCPCS procedure code to bill Medicare for this service was finally announced in the 2016 OPPS Final Rule. Providers also need to carefully review the numerous requirements of the NCD and the claim processing instructions. Medicare summarizes all of these requirements in MLN Matters Article MM9246. Review our list of 8 issues concerning LDCT lung cancer screening to make sure you know what needs to be checked off when providing this service.

1.Dates

Lung cancer screening by LDCT is covered annually for services performed on and after February 5, 2015. The implementation date is January 4, 2016. This means Medicare will begin processing claims with the new HCPCS codes on and after this date. Timely filing limits will apply so claims must be submitted within one year of the date of service. So if your facility began providing this service last February, you will need to hurry after the first of 2016 to get your claims to Medicare before your time runs out.

2.Patient Coverage Criteria

• Age 55-77 years
• Asymptomatic (no signs or symptoms of lung cancer)
• Tobacco smoking history of at least 30 pack-years (one-pack year = smoking one pack (20 cigarettes) per day for one year)
• Current smoker or one who has quit within last 15 years
• Receives a written order provided at
• a lung cancer screening counseling and shared decision making visit for the first screening
• any appropriate visit with a practitioner for subsequent screening

3.Written Order Requirements

Written orders for lung cancer LDCT screenings must be appropriately documented in the beneficiary’s medical records, and must contain the following information:

• Patient’s date of birth
• Number of actual pack-year smoking history
• Current smoking status and the number of years since quitting for former smokers
• Statement that patient is asymptomatic
• NPI of ordering practitioner

4.Counseling and Shared Decision Making Visit

The lung cancer screening counseling and shared decision making visit may be billed by a hospital on a type of bill 12x, 13x, or 85x (CAH). The counseling visit must:

• Be furnished by a physician or qualified non-physician practitioner (meaning a Physician Assistant (PA), Nurse Practitioner (NP), or Clinical Nurse Specialist (CNS) and
• Include all of the following elements:
• Determination of beneficiary eligibility including age, absence of signs or symptoms of lung cancer, a specific calculation of cigarette smoking pack-years; and if a former smoker, the number of years since quitting;
• Shared decision-making, including the use of one or more decision aids, to include benefits and harms of screening, follow-up diagnostic testing, over-diagnosis, false positive rate, and total radiation exposure;
• Counseling on the importance of adherence to annual lung cancer LDCT screening, impact of co-morbidities, and ability or willingness to undergo diagnosis and treatment;
• Counseling on the importance of maintaining cigarette smoking abstinence if former smoker; or the importance of smoking cessation if current smoker and, if appropriate, furnishing of information about tobacco cessation interventions; and,
• If appropriate, the furnishing of a written order for lung cancer screening with LDCT.

5.Other Coverage Requirements

The NCD also contains specific requirements for eligibility criteria for the reading radiologist and the radiology imaging facility. The imaging facility criteria include data submission to a CMS-approved registry.

6.HCPCS Codes

• G0296 –Counseling visit to discuss need for lung cancer screening (LDCT) using low dose CT scan (service is for eligibility determination and shared decision making)
• G0297 –Low dose CT scan (LDCT) for lung cancer screening

7.Diagnosis and Diagnosis Code Required for Coverage

Personal history of tobacco use/personal history of nicotine dependence

• ICD-9 code V15.82 (for dates of service from February 5 – September 30, 2015)
• ICD-10 code Z87.891 (for dates of service on and after October 1, 2015)

8.Hospital Payment and Waiver of Co-insurance/Deductible

Lung cancer screening provided in a hospital outpatient setting is paid under OPPS and there is no beneficiary deductible or co-payment. The unadjusted Medicare payment amount for 2016 is $69.65 for G0296 (counseling visit) and $112.49 for G0297 (LDCT scan).

9.Frequency

LDCT for lung cancer screening is covered once per year. At least 11 full months must elapse from the date of the last screening.

The links to the actual transmittals that are listed in the MLN Matters Article do not appear to be working. You can find the full transmittals at: CMS Transmittal R3374CP and CMS Transmittal R185NCD . So get busy checking off that list!