Knowledge Base Category -

Did You Know?

June is cataract awareness month and according to the National Eye Institute (link), most cataracts are age-related, there are no early symptoms of cataracts and later symptoms includes blurry vision, colors that seem faded, sensitivity to light, trouble seeing at night and double vision.

A cataract is diagnosed by a dilated eye exam and the treatment is surgery. Cataract surgery is one of the most common operations in the United States. In fact, more than half of all Americans aged eighty or older either have cataracts or have had surgery to get rid of cataracts.

Why it Matters?

Being a high-volume surgery, means scrutiny by CMS and Medicare Contractors to assure documentation in the medical record supports medical necessity of the procedure.

Recovery Audit Contractors

RAC Issue 0002 cataract removal (link) has been an approved complex review for procedures performed in the outpatient hospital setting and ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) since February 1, 2017. RACs will review documentation to determine if cataract surgery meets Medicare coverage criteria, meets applicable coding guidelines, and/or is medically reasonable and necessary. Applicable National Coverage Determinations (NCDs), Local Coverage Determinations (LCDs), and Local Coverage Articles (LCAs) are included in this RAC issue webpage.

Comprehensive Error Rate Testing (CERT)

In the 2021 CERT Medicare Fee-for-Service supplemental improper payment report, cataract removal and lens insertion is listed in Table D1: Top 20 Service Types with Highest Improper Payments: Part B (link).

The improper payment rate for this surgery was 12.7%. The CERT cites two types of errors, insufficient documentation, and incorrect coding, as being the cause of improper payments. Specifically, the insufficient documentation project improper payment was $190,495,888 and the incorrect coding improper payment was $27,844,602.

Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs)

Jurisdiction 15 (J15) MAC: CGS

Prior to the COVID-19 public health emergency, the J15 MAC CGS’ Targeted Probe and Educate (TPE) activities included cataract removal reviews. Their last results posted (link) was for reviews completed from January 1, 2020, through March 31, 2020, with a claim error rate in Ohio of 30.8%.

CGS’ review results list documentation that should be included to prevent denials. CGS has also published an cataract extraction with intraocular lens ADR checklist (link) for providers who are submitting medical records for review.

JF MAC: Noridian

In May 2021, Noridian, published a notification of their intent to perform a service specific targeted review of cataract removal (link). Noridian published review findings in November and December of 2021.

The review of claims for Arizona, Utah, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming included claims from May 3, 2021, through October 26, 2021. The overall claims error rate was 26.6% and payment error rate was 27%.

Their review of claims for Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington included claims from May 3, 2021, through November 16, 2021. The overall claim error rate was 71.3% and payment error rate was 70.5%.

In both reviews, claims were denied for the following two reasons:

• Documentation was not received timely in response to the additional documentation request (ADR), and
• Documentation did not support medical necessity per LCD requirements.

Noridian’s review results articles includes provider education detailing under what circumstances the surgery would be considered medical necessary and the required medical record documentation to support medical necessity.

Noridian also cites the 45-calendar day requirement for timely submission of documentation by providers.

Supplemental Medical Review Contractor (SMRC)

On February 16, 2022, the SMRC published a notification of their intent to review cataract surgeries performed in the physician office, outpatient hospital and specialty facility clinical access hospitals (link). In the background section of the notification, they note that “this type of surgery has been a topic of interest for the Office of Inspector General (OIG) for a number of years. The OIG looked into surgery in both the outpatient facility and ambulatory service center settings. CMS data reflects a potential vulnerability.”

What Can You Do?

With so many entities focused on reviewing cataract surgery claims, moving forward providers should:

• Respond to ADRs in a timely manner,
• Become familiar with medical necessity indications and documentation requirements detailed in Medicare coverage documents (NCDs, LCDs, LCAs),
• Be aware of who is performing cataract surgery reviews,
• Read published review results to understand reasons for denials and ways to prevent future denials, and
• Ensure physicians performing these procedures are also aware of Medicare coverage requirements.

CMS issued a display copy of the FY 2023 IPPS Proposed Rule (CMS-1762-IFC) on Monday, April 18, 2022. This article contains a high-level look at the proposed operating payment rate, quality program proposals, COVID-19 claims impact on setting MS-DRG relative weights, new ICD-10 diagnosis and procedure codes, CMS’ request for comments related to Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) and New Technology Add-On Payments.

Proposed Payment Rate Changes

The proposed increase in operating payment rates for general acute care hospitals paid under the IPPS that successfully participate in the Hospital Inpatient Quality Reporting (IQR) Program and are meaningful electronic health record (EHR) use is projected to be 3.2%.

Overall, CMS estimates hospitals payments will increase in FY 2023 by $1.6 billion.

Quality Program Proposals

Like FY 2022, CMS is proposing to suppress or refine several measures in the Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP), Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) Reduction Program, and Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Program.

Due to proposed measure suppression for Hospital VBP Program, CMS has proposed to award all hospitals a value-based payment amount for each discharge that is equal to the 2% withheld. They have also proposed to not impose the payment penalty on any hospitals in FY 2023 due to low performance in the HAC Reduction Program.

One or several proposals related to the HRRP is a proposal to modify all six conditions/procedures specific to the readmissions measures to include a covariate adjustment for history of COVID-19 within one year preceding the index admission, beginning with the FY 2024 program year.

Calculating MS-DRG Relative Weights

CMS notes, in a related Fact Sheet, it is reasonable to assume Medicare beneficiaries will continue to be hospitalized with COVID-19 and current information available the volume of hospitalizations will be fewer than are reflected in the FY 2021 data.

Based on these assumptions, CMS is proposing to calculate relative weights for FY 2023 by:

• Calculating two sets of relative weights, one including and one excluding COVID-19 claims, and
• Average the two sets of relative weights to determine the final FY 2023 relative weights.

CMS has also proposed a 10% cap on relative weight decrease from the prior fiscal year.

ICD-10 Diagnosis Codes by the Numbers

There are 1,176 new diagnosis codes (Table 6A). Of these codes, thirty-five codes have been designated as an MCC and one hundred thirty-six codes have been designated as an CC. Following are examples of the types of new codes:

• Three new acidosis codes (E87.20 acidosis, unspecified, E87.21 chronic metabolic acidosis, and E87.29 other acidosis)
• Sixty-nine new dementia with manifestations codes,
• Nine new codes for refractory angina pectoris (i.e., I20.2 refractory angina pectoris),
• Eighteen new methamphetamines codes including poisoning by, adverse effect of and underdosing of codes,
• Four hundred seventy-four codes describing electric (assisted) bicycle or motorcycle accidents,
• Three codes related to COVID-19 vaccination and other immunization status that were effective April 1, 2022, and
• Three new Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) codes (Z59.82 transportation insecurity, Z59.86 financial insecurity, and Z59.87 material hardship).

Request for Information on Social Determinants of Health

The subset of Z codes describing SDOHs are found in categories Z55-Z65 (Persons with potential health hazards related to socioeconomic and psychosocial circumstances).

CMS believes reporting of SDOH Z codes may better determine the resource utilization for treating patients experiencing these circumstances to help inform whether a change to the severity designation of these codes would be clinically warranted.

CMS also notes that, if SDOH Z codes are not consistently reported in inpatient claims data, our methodology utilized to mathematically measure the impact on resource use, as described previously, may not adequately reflect what additional resources were expended by the hospital to address these SDOH circumstances in terms of requiring clinical evaluation, extended length of hospital stay, increased nursing care or monitoring or both, and comprehensive discharge planning.

They are seeking public comment on issues related to SDOHs, including the following questions:

• How the reporting of certain Z codes – and if so, which Z codes - may improve our ability to recognize severity of illness, complexity of illness, and utilization of resources under the MS-DRGs?
• Whether CMS should require the reporting of certain Z codes – and if so, which ones – to be reported on hospital inpatient claims to strengthen data analysis?
• What would be the additional provider burden and potential benefits of documenting and reporting of certain Z codes, including potential benefits to beneficiaries?
• Whether codes in category Z59 (Homelessness) have been underreported and if so, why? We are interested in hearing the perspectives of large urban hospitals, rural hospitals, and other hospital types regarding their experience. We also seek comments on how factors such as hospital size and type might impact a hospital’s ability to develop standardized consistent protocols to better screen, document, and report homelessness.

ICD-10 Procedure Codes by the Numbers

There are fifty-four new procedures codes (Table 6B). Of these codes:

• thirty-eight have been designated as O.R. procedure codes,
• twelve have been designated as non-O.R. procedure codes,
• nine of the twelve non-O.R. procedure codes were implemented April 1, 2022, and includes new technology codes for COVID-19 vaccines and drugs to treat COVID-19, and
• four have been designated as non-O.R. procedure codes affecting the DRG assignment.

You can find new ICD-10 diagnosis and procedure codes as well as proposed changes to the MCC and CC lists for FY 2023 in tables available on the CMS IPPS Proposed Rule Home Page.

New Technology Add-On Payment (NTAP) Policy

The NTAP policy provides additional payment beyond the MS-DRG for cases where a CMS designated new technology was used and coded on the claim. Note, this “is not budget neutral and is generally limited to the 2-to 3-year period following the date of the FDA approval or clearance for marketing.”

CMS is proposing a one-year extension of new technology add-on payments for fifteen technologies for which the new technology add-on payment would otherwise be discontinued beginning FY 2022. Collectively in FY 2023, the estimated number of cases for the fifteen technologies is 192,455 and the estimated payment impact is $612,910,746.15.

There are twenty-six applications discussed in the proposed rule for new technologies seeking approval for an add-on payment.

I encourage you to submit comments to CMS. The deadline to submit comments is 5 p.m. EDT on June 28, 2021.

Resources

• CMS FY 2022 IPPS Proposed Rule CMS Fact Sheet: https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/fact-sheets/fy-2023-hospital-inpatient-prospective-payment-system-ipps-and-long-term-care-hospitals-ltch-pps
• CMS FY 2023 Proposed Rule Home Page: https://www.cms.gov/medicare/acute-inpatient-pps/fy-2023-ipps-proposed-rule-home-page

CMS issued the FY 2023 IPPS Proposed Rule (CMS-1762-IFC) display copy on Monday April 18, 2021. You can find a high level review of what is being proposed in a related MMP article by clicking here. This article focuses on three proposals in section II. Proposed Changes to Medicare Severity Diagnosis-Related Group (MS-DRG) Classifications and Relative Weights, of the Proposed Rule. Each MS-DRG refinement synopsis includes the potential financial impact if the proposal is finalized.

Calculating the potential financial impact was accomplished through a collaboration with RealTime Medicare Data (RTMD). RTMD’s database currently includes Medicare Fee-for-Service paid claims data for all U.S. states and territories except Kentucky and Ohio. RTMD claims analysis in this article represents Medicare Fee-for-Service paid claims data for CY 2021 in the RTMD footprint

Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS)M

CMS received a request to reassign cases reporting diagnois code J80 (Acute respiratory distress syndrome) as the principal diagnosis from MS-DRG 204 (Respiratory Signs and Symptoms) to MS-DRG 189 (Pulmonary Edema and Respiratory Failure). The requestor noted that in the ICD-10-CM Tabular List of Diseases, per the Excludes 1 note under category J96 (Respiratory Failure, not elsewhere classified) only code J80 should be assigned when respiratory failure and ARDs are both documented. Currently, a principal diagnosis of J80 groups to MS-DRG 204.

CMS data analysis supports that cases reporting ARDS (J80) are more appropriately aligned with the average length of stay and average costs of the cases in MS-DRG 189 and they have proposed to reassign cases with ARDS (code J80) as the principal diagnosis from MS-DRG 204 to MS-DRG 189.

RTMD Claims Analysis

In Calendar Year (CY) 2021, in the RTMD database, there were 255 claims sequenced to MS-DRG 204 (Respiratory Signs and Symptoms) with a principal diagnosis of J80 (ARDS). Based on the CMS FY 2022 Final Rule, the shift from MS-DRG 204 to MS-DRG 189 would result in:

• An increase in the MS-DRG Relative Weight (R.W.) of 0.4325, and
• An increase in the MS-DRG National Average Payment of $2,612.56.

For the 255 claims with a principal diagnosis of J80 (ARDS) in CY 2021, the reassignment to MS-DRG 189 would results in a $666,202.80 increase in payment for this group of claims.

Cardiac Mapping

CMS identified a replication issue from ICD-9 based MS-DRGs to ICD-10 based MS-DRGs for procedure code 02K80ZZ (Map conduction mechanism, open approach). Cardiac mapping describes the creation of detailed maps to detect how the electrical signals that control the timing of the heart rhythm move between each heartbeat to identify the location of rhythm disorders. Cardiac mapping is generally performed during open-heart surgery or performed via cardiac catheterization.

This code is currently recognized as a non-O.R. procedure that affects the MS-DRG to which it is assigned. CMS is proposing to reassign this code from MS-DRGs 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, and 251 to MS-DRGs 273 and 274 (Percutaneous and Other Intracardiac Procedures with and without MCC, respectively)

RTMD Claims Analysis

There were no claims in the RTMD database for CY 2021 where MS-DRGs 246, 247, 248, 249 and 250 included procedure code 02K80ZZ (Map conduction mechanism, open approach).

Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy with Common Bile Duct Exploration

A requestor noted that when a laparoscopic cholecystectomy is reported with any one of the listed procedure codes with a common bile duct exploration and gallstone removal procedure that is performed laparoscopically and reported with procedure code 0FC94ZZ, the resulting assignment is MS-DRGs 417, 418 and 419 (Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy without C.D.E. with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively). This MS-DRG assignment does not recognize that a common bile duct exploration (C.D.E.) was performed.

CMS’ clinical advisors agreed that procedure code 0FC94ZZ describes a common bile duct exploration procedure with removal of a gallstone and should be added to the logic for case assignment to MS-DRGs 411, 412, and 413 for clinical coherence with the other procedures that describe a common bile duct exploration. CMS has proposed to redesignate procedure code 0FC94ZZ from a non-O.R. procedure to an O.R. procedure and add it to the logic list for common bile duct exploration (CDE) in MS-DRGs 411, 412, and 413 (Cholecystectomy with C.D.E. with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively).

RTMD Claims Analysis

In CY 2021, in the RTMD database, there were 188 claims that sequenced to the MS-DRG group 417, 418, and 419 (Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy without C.D.E. with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC respectively) that included the procedure code 0FC94ZZ describing a common bile duct exploration procedure with removal of a gallstone.

Based on the CMS FY 2022 Final Rule, following are the shifts in R.W. and national average payment by DRG severity levels:

• The increase from MS-DRG 417 to MS-DRG 411 (Chlecystectomy w/C.D.E. w/MCC) in R.W. is 1.3120 and national average payment of $8,029.19,
• The increase from MS-DRG 418 to MS-DRG 412 (Cholecystecomy w/C.D.E. w/CC) in R.W. is 0.5885 and national average payment of $3,554.90, and
• The increase from MS-DRG 419 to MS-DRG 413 (Cholecystecomy w/C.D.E. w/o CC/MCC) in R.W. is 0.4156 and national average payment of $2,510.48.

I encourage key stakeholders take the time to review the proposed rule and remember that CMS is accepting comments on the proposed rule through 5 p.m. EDT on June 17, 2022.

Resources

• CMS FY 2023 IPPS Proposed Rule CMS Fact Sheet: https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/fact-sheets/fy-2023-hospital-inpatient-prospective-payment-system-ipps-and-long-term-care-hospitals-ltch-pps
• CMS FY 2023 Proposed Rule web page: https://www.cms.gov/medicare/acute-inpatient-pps/fy-2023-ipps-proposed-rule-home-page

Even though, Halloween has come and gone, the shift in your Hospital Readmission Reduction Program penalty for the new CMS Fiscal Year may or may not be a treat.

Did You Know?

It has been a decade since CMS began reducing payments to hospitals for excessive readmissions. The payment reduction is capped at 3 percent (that is, a payment adjustment factor of 0.97). And while your penalty rate is based on unplanned readmissions for the following six conditions, the penalty is applied to all Medicare Fee-for-Service inpatient discharges:

• Acute myocardial infarction (MI),
• Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD),
• Heart Failure (HF),
• Pneumonia,
• Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) surgery, and
• Elective primary total hip arthroplasty and/or total knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA).

The CMS unplanned hospital visits provider data was last updated September 22, 2021 and released on October 27, 2021 (link). Note, data for the first and second quarters of 2020 are not included in this release due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. CMS has updated the Medicare Hospital Compare webpage (link) with the latest data release.

Why it Matters?

FY 2022 Readmission Reduction Penalties by the Numbers According to a Kaiser Health News article by Jordan Rau (link):

• 2,499 or 47% of all hospitals will be receiving reduced payments,
• The average penalty is a 0.64% reduction in payment,
• Congress’ Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) has noted that the average fines for a hospital in 2018 was $217,000.
• For FY 2022, 82% of hospitals will receive a penalty. This is nearly the same number of hospitals as last year.

What Can You Do?

I encourage you to read the Kaiser Health News article and access the accompanying Look-Up Tool (link) where you will find a trend of your hospitals Readmission Penalties from FY 2015 through 2022.

MMP and RealTime Medicare Data (RTMD) have collaborated to highlight Health Awareness Month topics throughout the year with an infographic spotlight on Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) paid claims data comparatives and a related article. June is Cataract Awareness Month. The American Academy of Ophthalmology notes that “cataract is one of blindness in the United States. If not treated, cataracts can lead to blindness. In addition, the longer cataracts are left untreated, the more difficult it can be to successfully remove the cataract and restore vision. During Cataract Awareness Month in June, the American Academy of Ophthalmology reminds the public that early detection and treatment of cataracts is critical to preserving sight.”

Did You Know?

According to Medicare.gov (link) the average amount that a patient pays for extracapsular lens removal with insertion of intraocular lens prosthesis (CPT 66984) is $316 in the Ambulatory Surgery Center (ASC) setting and $524 in a Hospital Outpatient Department.

Several Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) have Local Coverage Determinations (LCDs) and Local Coverage Articles (LCAs) related to cataract removal.

Why Does this Matter?

The CERT, Recovery Auditors and a two of the MACs are reviewing cataract procedure records. Reviews include the ASC and Hospital Outpatient Department Settings.

Comprehensive Error Rate Testing (CERT)

In the 2020 Medicare Fee-for-Service Supplemental Improper Payment Data (link), the CERT review contractor indicates they reviewed 209 Part B claims and identified a 6% improper payment rate that equates to a projected improper payment amount of $111,696,441.

Recovery Auditors

There are currently three approved RAC issues related to cataracts:

• Issue 0002: Cataract Removal: Medical Necessity & Documentation Requirements,
• Issue 0083: Cataract Removal: Excessive Units (partial), and
• Issue 0084: Cataract Removal: Partial Payment.

Provider Types they have been approved to review includes ASC, Outpatient Hospitals and specific to Issue 0083 and 0084 Professional Services.

CGS MAC for Jurisdiction 15 (J15)

Prior to CMS temporarily pausing the Targeted Probe and Educate (TPE) Program, reviewing Medicare Part A claims for cataract removal was part of CGS’, the MAC for Kentucky and Ohio, list of review topics. A Cataract Extraction with IOL ADR Checklist (link) is available on the CGS website.

Palmetto GBA JJ and JM

Palmetto GBA, the MAC for Jurisdictions J (Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee) and M (North and South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia) recently published service-specific post payment probe review results of CPT 66984, Extracapsular Cataract Removal with insertion for both Jurisdictions. Both articles include state specific findings, reasons for claims denials and recommendations to prevent future denials.

• April 14, 2021, Palmetto GBA JJ Part B results (link): 680 claims were reviewed, with 110 (16.17%) claims being completely or partially denied. The charge denial rate of 15.65% equated to $59,466.77 in denials.
• May 11, 2021, Palmetto GBA, JM Part B results (link): 2,508 claims were reviewed, with 128 (5.1%) claims being completely or partially denied. The charge denial rate of 5.13% equated to $76,598.10 in denials.

Based on their findings, Palmetto plans to continue post-payment reviews of CPT 66984 in both Jurisdictions.

What You Can Do About It?

• Identify whether there is an applicable LCD and LCA for your MAC jurisdiction.
• Read Palmetto GBA’s Cataract Removal article (link) which provides conditions or circumstances when lens extraction is considered medically necessary and therefore covered by Medicare.
• Share this information with Providers performing these procedures at your facility.
• Review a sample of your cataract claims for documentation supporting the medical necessity of the service.

Resource

• CMS MLN Matters SE1319: Cataract Removal, Part B: (link)

This week, as we highlight key updates spanning from May 18h through May 24th, 2021, will be our last weekly COVID-19 update. While COVID-19 remains a serious issue, the availability of COVID-19 vaccinations and the significant decrease in new cases being reported are positive reasons to end this weekly addition to our newsletter. MMP is thankful to all front line workers who have worked tirelessly and continue to care for patient’s diagnosed with COVID-19.

Resource Spotlight: CDC Clinical Outreach Call – Underlying Medical Conditions and Severe COVID-19: Evidence-based Information for Healthcare Providers

The CDC is offering this call on Thursday May 27, 2021 from 2:00 PM – 3:00 PM ET. They note that clinicians will be updated “on the underlying medical conditions associated with severe COVID-19, describe methods used to rate the evidence linking conditions to severe COVID-19, review the evidence on risk for conditions included, and provide resources for healthcare providers caring for patients with underlying medical conditions.” If you are interested in this information but unable to attend, call materials will be posted on this CDC webpage after the call. (link)

May 17, 2021: U.S. Attorney’s Office and OIG Advise Providers Not to Charge Individuals Seeking COVID-19 Vaccines

The U.S. Department of Justice issued a notice for immediate release (link) advising the public that they should not be asked to pay to receive the COVID-19 vaccine and warned COVID-19 vaccination providers to not seek payments from people who received a vaccine.

May 19, 2021: HHS Issues Request for Information (RFI) regarding the Medical Reserve Corps (MRC) Program

The American Rescue Plan provides $100 million to the MRC Program. HHS issued an RFI (link) to “solicit specific input regarding current strengths and needs of MRC units and stakeholders, resource gaps highlighted during the COVID-19 response and recommendations for short- and long-term priorities for the MRC.

May 19, 2021: FDA Reminder – Antibody Testing Not for Assessing Immunity after COVID-19 Vaccination

The FDA issued a reminder (link) to the public and health care providers that the currently authorized antibody test should not be used to assess “immunity or protection from COVID-19 at any time, and especially after the person received a COVID-19 vaccination.”

May 20, 2021: Medicare COVID-19 Data Snapshot Updated

This most recent release of Preliminary COVID-19 Data (link) includes Medicare claims and encounter data from January 1, 2020 to March 20, 2021 and were received by April 16, 2021. As of April 16, 2021 there have been 691,077 Medicare Fee-for-Service COVID-19 hospitalizations with a total Medicare payment for these hospitalizations of $16.6 billion and the average payment for a beneficiary hospitalized with COVID-19 being $24,033.

MMP and RealTime Medicare Data (RTMD) have collaborated to highlight Health Awareness Month topics throughout the year with an infographic spotlight on Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) paid claims data comparatives and a related article. May is Stroke Awareness Month. The American Heart Association notes this month was created to promote public awareness and reduce the incidence of stroke in the United States. This article focuses on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS).

Did You Know?

Originally, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHHS) was developed to measure baseline data for patients involved in acute stroke clinical trials. In 1995, after the publication of the Trial, the NIHSS became the de facto standard for rating clinical deficits in stroke trials.*

Prior to the implementation of ICD-10-CM, there was no way for Coding Professionals to capture the NIHSS. In fact, it wasn’t until FY 2017 that coding guidance was added to the ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting related to coding NIHSS codes (link).

Why Does this Matter?

In the FY 2018 IPPS Final Rule, CMS finalized a refinement to the Stroke 30-Day Mortality Measure (MORT-30-STK) for the FY 2023 payment determination by including the NIHSS. CMS noted in Final Rule that they had “received comments that the more rigorous risk adjustment facilitated by the NIH Stroke Scale would help ensure the measure accurately risk adjusts for different hospital populations without unfairly penalizing high-performance providers, and the NIH Stroke Scale is well validated, highly reliable, widely used by providers caring for stroke patients, and a strong predictor of mortality and short- and long-term functional outcomes. However, we were not able to test the ICD-10 CM codes for NIH Stroke Scale score in claims during measure development because those codes were not available for hospitals to use in their claims until October 2016. Therefore, we proposed this measure now to inform hospitals they should begin to include the NIH stroke severity scale codes in the claims they submit for patients with a discharge diagnosis of ischemic stroke.”

This month’s related RTMD infographic spotlights how often one of the NIHSS codes was included on Ischemic Stroke MS-DRGs 061, 062, and 063 Medicare FFS paid claims in FY 2019. Across RTMD’s Footprint, 40.1% of the claims included an NIHSS. Drilling down to the state compare, you will find a wide variance in how often the NIHSS codes are being captured.

The February 1, 2021 Update to the MORT-30-STK Measure notes that “the major revision is to include the NIH Stroke Scale as a measure of stroke severity in the risk-adjustment.”

What You Can Do About It?

Be aware that the absence of an NIHSS on your acute stroke claims can negatively impact the risk adjustment for your Hospital 30-Day Mortality Following Acute Ischemic Stroke Hospitalization Measure.

Then moving forward:

• Make sure this information is consistently being documented in your medical records, and
• Educate your Coding staff about the NIHSS and the need to ensure it is coded on all of your acute stroke cases.

Education Resource

The National Institutes of Health (NIHs) website Know Stroke (link) includes health professional specific resources related to NIHSS.

*”Using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale A Cautionary Tale.” Lyden, Patrick. AHA Stroke Journal, 11 Jan 2017, https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/strokeaha.116.015434

This week we highlight key updates spanning from May 11h through May 17th, 2021.

Resource Spotlight: Happy Belated National Women’s Health Week

National Women’s Health Week was last week (May 9th – 15th). This effort is led by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office on Women’s Health (OWH). According to a related Fact Sheet (link), this year’s week served “as a reminder for women and girls, especially during the outbreak of COVID-19, to make their health a priority and take care of themselves. It is extremely important for all women and girls, especially those with underlying health conditions, such as hypertension, diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular and respiratory conditions and older adults, to take care of your health now.” You can read more about this event on the OWH website by clicking here.

Palmetto Statement in daily newsletter:

“CMS would like to make you aware that the federally supported website (link) that makes it easier for individuals to access COVID-19 vaccines is now live. Vaccines.gov (link) — powered by the trusted VaccineFinder brand — is available in English and Spanish, with high accessibility standard, and will help connect Americans with locations offering vaccines near them. In addition to the website, people in the U.S. are also now able to utilize a text message service, available in both English and Spanish. People can text their ZIP Code to 438829 (GETVAX) and 822862 (VACUNA) to find three locations nearby that have vaccines available.

Vaccines.gov is meant to complement the number of state and pharmacy websites that have been successfully connecting many Americans with vaccinations, by providing a unified federal resource for Americans to use no matter where they are.

In addition to the website and text messaging service, the National COVID-19 Vaccination Assistance Hotline is now available to help those who prefer to get information by phone on where to get a vaccine. Call 1-800-232-0233 to find a location near you.”
Link to announcement

May 11, 2021: CMS Issues Interim Final Rule for Long Term Care Facilities

CMS announced in a Special Edition MLN Connects (link) that they have released an interim final rule “that will ensure long-term care facilities , and residential facilities serving clients with intellectual disabilities, educate and offer the COVID-19 vaccine to residents, clients, and staff.” While the requirements of this rule is for Long-Term Care (LTC) facilities and Intermediate Care Facilities for Individuals with Intellectual Disabilities (ICFs-IID), CMS ends this announcement by indicating they are “seeking comment on opportunities to expand these policies to help encourage vaccine uptake and access in other congregate care settings.”

At the onset of the pandemic, FDA inspections began to be reserved for what they describe as “mission-critical issues” based on the following four factors:

May 13, 2021: CDC Updates Guidance for Fully Vaccinated People

The CDC provided the following two updates on their Guidance for Fully Vaccinated People webpage (link):

• You no longer need to wear a mask or physically distance in any setting, except where required by federal , state, local, tribal, or territorial laws, rules, and regulations, including local business and workplace guidance, and
• You can refrain from testing following a known exposure unless they are residents or employees of a correctional or detention facility or a homeless shelter.

I encourage you to visit this webpage for additional recommendations for indoor and outdoor settings and travel (Domestic and International).

May 14, 2021: CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report: COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness

The CDC posted a report (link) regarding vaccine effectiveness of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines among health care personnel (HCP) at 33 U.S. sites from January to March 2021. In the report summary they indicate what is added by this report is information about COVID-19 effectiveness:

• A single dose of Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna COVID-19 vaccines is 82% effective against symptomatic COVID-19, and
• Two doses is 94% effective.

May 14, 2021: CDC Call – "What Clinicians Need to Know about Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccination of Adolescents" – In case you missed it, the CDC held a Clinician Outreach and Communication Activity (COCA) call this past Friday, May 14th. This call:

• Provided clinicians with an overview of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccination in adolescents who are 12-to-15 years old, and
• Provided information about safety and efficacy of the vaccine, vaccine recommendations, and clinical guidance.

You can access the call materials including slides on this CDC webpage (link).

CMS issued the FY 2022 IPPS Proposed Rule (CMS-1762-IFC) on Tuesday April 27, 2021. You can find a high level review of what is being proposed in a related MMP article (link). This article focuses on two topics in section D, Proposed Changes to Specific MS-DRG Classifications, of the Proposed Rule. Each topic synopsis also includes the potential financial impact if the proposal is finalized.

In the proposed rule, CMS acknowledges the impact that the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency (PHE) had during FY 2020. Subsequently, they have proposed to use FY 2019 data to approximate the expected FY 2022 inpatient hospital utilization.

Calculating the potential financial impact of proposals was accomplished through a collaboration with RealTime Medicare Data (RTMD). RTMD’s database currently includes Medicare Fee-for-Service paid claims data for all U.S. states and territories except Kentucky and Ohio. The potential financial impacts noted in this article represent FY 2019 Medicare Fee-for-Service claims data for all 48 states in RTMD’s footprint collectively.

Type II Myocardial Infarction

“Type 2 myocardial infarction (myocardial infarction due to demand ischemia or secondary to ischemic imbalance) is assigned to code I21.A1, Myocardial infarction type 2 with the underlying cause coded first.”

Source: ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting FY 2021 (link)

A requestor noted that when a type 2 Myocardial infarction (MI) is coded and the principal diagnosis is in MDC 5 (Diseases and Disorders of the Circulatory System), the Grouper logic assigns the MI to the following MS-DRGs:

• MS-DRGs 280, 281 & 282: Acute Myocardial Infarction, Discharged Alive with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively, and
• MS-DRGs 283, 284 & 285: Acute Myocardial Infection, Expired with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively.

The requestor asked if this Grouper logic is appropriate. Through analysis and consultation with their clinical advisors, CMS determined that the current Grouper logic is correct and no proposal for change was made.

During their analysis, CMS did note an issue with a Type 2 MI and the Grouper logic for MS-DRGs 222 and 223 (Cardiac Defibrillator Implant with Cardiac Catheterization with AMI, HF, or Shock with and without MCC, respectively). Currently, Type 2 MI is one of the listed principal diagnosis codes in the logic for this DRG pair. However, Type 2 MI as a secondary diagnosis is not recognized.

Simply put, this means that currently an encounter for a patient undergoing a cardiac defibrillator implant with cardiac catheterization and a Type 2 MI sequences to MS-DRGs 224 and 225 (Cardiac Defibrillator Implant with Cardiac Catheterization without AMI, HF, or Shock with and without MCC).

Clinical advisors recommended, and CMS is proposing to add special logic in MS-DRGs 222 and 223 “to allow cases reporting diagnosis I21.A1…as a secondary diagnosis to group to MS-DRGs 222 and 223 when reported with a listed procedure code for clinical consistency with the other MS-DRGs describing acute myocardial infarction.”

Potential Impact of Type II MI Proposal

Across the RTMD footprint, in FY 2019:

• 208 claims with a secondary diagnosis of type 2 MI grouped to MS-DRG 224 (Cardiac Defibrillator Implant with Cardiac Catheterization without AMI, HF, or Shock with MCC),
• CMS paid $10,938,624.59 to hospitals for MS-DRG 224 claims.
• In FY 2019, the national average payment for the Cardiac Defibrillator MS-DRG with AMI (MS-DRG 222), was $3,967.69 more than MS-DRG 224.
• The national average difference in payment multiplied by the volume of MS-DRG 224 claims equates to an underpayment amount to hospitals of $825,279.52.

Viral Cardiomyopathy

There are five ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes in the Viral Carditis subcategory B33.2. Currently, four of the codes are assigned to the Circulatory MDC 05:

• B33.20: Viral carditis, unspecified,

• B33.21: Viral endocarditis,
• B33.22: Viral myocarditis, and
• B33.23: Viral pericarditis.

However, the remaining code, B33.24 (Viral cardiomyopathy) is assigned to MDC 18 (Infectious and Parasitic Diseases, Systemic of Unspecified Sites). A requestor noted this “discontinuity” and stated that it would be “clinically appropriate” for all five diagnosis be assigned to MDC 05.

CMS agreed with the requestor and has proposed to reassign ICD-10-CM diagnosis code B33.24 from MDC 18 MS-DRGs 865 and 866 (Viral Illness with and without MCC, respectively) to MDC 05 in MS-DRGs 314, 315, and 316 (Other Circulatory System Diagnoses with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC, respectively).

Potential Impact of Viral Cardiomyopathy Proposal

In FY 2019, CMS paid sixteen claims with viral cardiomyopathy (B33.24) coded as the principal diagnosis. Specifically, CMS paid:

• $109,042.08 for 13 MS-DRG 865 (Viral Illness with MCC) claims, and
• $12,218.67 for 3 MS-DRG 866 (Viral Illness without MCC) claims.

As noted above, CMS’ proposal would move Viral cardiomyopathy from a DRG pair (MS-DRGs 865 and 866) with a two way severity split (with and without MCC) to a MS-DRG Group (MS-DRGs 314, 315, and 316) with a three way severity split (with MCC, with CC, and without CC/MCC). To estimate the financial impact, I took the conservative approach to calculate the difference in payment for the three MS-DRGs without MCC as if they also did not have a CC. Based on the national average payment, the shift in DRG assignment would equate to a net increase in payment for these sixteen claims of $34,535.43.

Note, there are several other changes being proposed, for example:

• A proposal related to surgical ablations for Atrial fibrillation (AF) to revise the surgical hierarchy in MDC 05 to sequence MS-DRGs 231-236 (Coronary Bypass) above MS-DRGs 228 and 229 to enable a more appropriate MS-DRG assignment for these cases, and
  • A proposal to add three procedure code combinations describing removal and replacement of the right knee joint that were inadvertently omitted to the MS-DRGs that the same procedure combinations currently sequence to for the left knee (MS-DRGs 461, 462, 466, 467, and 468 in MDC 08 and MS-DRGs 628, 629, and 630 in MDC 10).

    I encourage key stakeholders take the time to review the proposed rule and remember that CMS is accepting comments on the proposed rule through 5 p.m. EDT on June 28, 2021.

    Resources

    • CMS FY 2022 IPPS Proposed Rule CMS Fact Sheet:(link)
    • CMS FY 2022 Proposed Rule web page: (link)

CMS issued the FY 2022 IPPS Proposed Rule (CMS-1762-IFC) on Tuesday April 27, 2021. You can find a high level review of what is being proposed in a related MMP article (link). Another article in this week’s newsletter focuses on a couple of topics in section D, Proposed Changes to Specific MS-DRG Classifications, of the Proposed Rule. Each topic synopsis includes the potential financial impact if the proposal is finalized.

This article highlights proposed O.R. designation changes for ICD-10-PCS procedure codes as well as a change finalized for FY 2021. Calculating the potential financial impact of proposals was accomplished through a collaboration with RealTime Medicare Data (RTMD). RTMD’s database currently includes Medicare Fee-for-Service paid claims data for all U.S. states and territories except Kentucky and Ohio. RTMD claims dates of service in this article includes:

• FY 2019 Medicare Fee-for-Service claims for all 48 states in RTMD’s footprint collectively, and
• Venal Cava Filter: FY 2020 Medicare Fee-for-Service paid claims as the change from an O.R. to Non-O.R. procedure was finalized in FY 2021.

O.R. and Non-O.R. Procedures Status Re-Designation

In the Acute Care Hospital Inpatient setting, discharges are assigned to one Medicare Severity Diagnosis-Related Group (MS-DRGs) for the entire hospitalization. The MS-DRG System groups together similar clinical conditions and the procedures furnished during a hospitalization.

Principal Diagnoses, MCCs (Major Complications/Comorbidities), CCs (Complications/Comorbidities) and Procedures may all impact MS-DRG assignment. Notice, I did not say will impact MS-DRG assignment. This is because there are specific MCCs, CCs and O.R. Procedures designated by CMS that will impact MS-DRG assignment and other secondary diagnoses and Non-O.R. designated procedures that won’t.

When ICD-10-CM/PCS was implemented on October 1, 2015, there were several new O.R. Procedure Codes impacting MS-DRG assignment that had Coding Professionals and CDI Specialists questioning if the resources to perform the procedures truly supported the O.R. Procedure designation. CMS soon realized this too and included proposals in the FY 2017 IPPS Proposed Rule for consideration to re-designate certain ICD-10-PCS procedures codes from O.R. Procedures to Non-O.R. Procedures as well as Non-O.R. Procedures to O.R. Procedures. CMS received requests and recommendations for over 800 procedure codes and were unable to fully evaluate and finalize comments in time for the release of the FY 2017 IPPS Final Rule. The next year, in FY 2018, they began the process of proposing and finalizing changes to ICD-10-PCS procedures codes O.R. status designation.

Since FY 2018, CMS has continued to propose and re-designate ICD-10-PCS procedure codes O.R. status designation and the FY 2022 Proposed Rule is no exception.

FY 2022 O.R. to Non-O.R. Procedures Proposal and Potential Financial Impact

• 31 specific ICD-10-PCS procedures codes have been proposed for re-designated as Non-O.R. procedures.
• In FY 2019 there were 13,714 claims paid where one of these 31 codes was the principal procedure code driving the MS-DRG assignment.
• CMS paid $220,018,645.02 to hospitals for these 13,714 claims.

When CMS first began this process in FY 2018, MMP provided our clients with a detailed accounting of their hospital specific surgical MS-DRGs claims impacted by the proposed rule and what the equivalent medical MS-DRG would be based on the medical principal diagnosis and minus the surgical procedure. What we found was that the decrease in payment from a surgical MS-DRG to a medical MS-DRG ranged from a 35% to 58% with an average decrease of 40%. Multiplying the payment for the 13,714 claims by 40% equates to a potential decrease in payment to hospitals of $88,007,458.

FY 2022 Non-O.R. Procedures to O.R. Procedures Proposal and Potential Financial Impact

• 46 specific ICD-10-PCS procedure codes have been proposed for re-designation from Non-O.R. Procedure to O.R. Procedures.
• In FY 2019 there were 3,604 medical MS-DRG claims paid that included one of the 46 codes proposed for re-designation.
• CMS paid $47,122,242.22 to hospitals for these 3,604 claims.
• Following the same logic as with O.R. to Non-O.R. procedures, adding 40% to the payment would result in an additional potential payment to hospitals of $47,122,242.22.

Vena Cava Filter ICD-10-PCS Procedure Code 06H03DZ

In FY 2018, based on feedback from one commenter, CMS did not finalize the re-designation of ICD-10-PCS code 06H03DZ (Insertion of intraluminal device, into inferior vena cava, percutaneous approach) from O.R. to a Non-O.R. procedure. However, CMS did finalize the re-designation of ICD-10-PCS procedure code 06H03DZ to a Non-O.R. procedure in the FY 2021 Final Rule.

In the FY 2022 Proposed Rule, one requestor “respectfully disagreed” with this decision. CMS notes that their clinical advisors continue to state that this change “better reflects the associated technical complexity and hospital resource use of this procedure.”

Potential Financial Impact

COVID-19 PHE had a tremendous impact on inpatient hospital utilization in 2020 and as mentioned at the start of this article, CMS has proposed to use FY 2019 data to approximate the expected FY 2022 inpatient hospital utilization. However, since this proposed change was finalized in the FY 2021 Final Rule, the potential impact below is based on FY 2020 claims provided by RTMD.

• 12,469 claims in FY 2020 included ICD-10-PCS procedure code 06H03DZ as the principal procedure code.
• Total Charges by hospitals for this group of claims was $1,773,710,236.89.
• CMS paid $343,009,156.37 to hospitals for this group of claims.
• Potential impact of this change for FY 2021 will be a decrease in payment of $343,009,156.37.

Resources

• CMS FY 2022 IPPS Proposed Rule CMS Fact Sheet:(link)
• CMS FY 2022 Proposed Rule web page: (link)