Confusion Persists Regarding CMS Requirements for Face-to-Face IRF Visits

While we’ve addressed this titular issue in prior articles, it is one of the most common issues about which we receive questions from the field in our consulting practice.

Chapter 1, Section 110.2.4 of the Medicare Benefit Policy Manual outlines Medicare’s requirements for physician supervision of the patient in the inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF). The regulations note that “close physician involvement in the patient’s care is demonstrated by documented face-to-face visits from a rehabilitation physician or other licensed treating physician with specialized training and experience in rehabilitation at least three days per week throughout the patient’s IRF stay.” These visits are meant to assess the patient from both a medical and functional perspective, and to adjust treatment based on that assessment. These visits must be clearly documented in the medical record by the rehabilitation physician.

The regulation appears clear enough, so why the mystery? The confusion appears to relate to what constitutes an actual face-to-face visit and what does not. 

What Doesn’t Count?

Medicare has provided specific clarifications indicating that neither the post-admission physician evaluation (PAPE) nor the interdisciplinary team meeting note serve to meet the face-to-face visit requirement.

While there has been no specific language that includes the history and physical (H&P) in that guidance, we believe that the H&P is considered part of the content requirements of the PAPE and thus does not meet the broader face-to-face requirement. In a detailed clarification related to the PAPE, Medicare has indicated that “the post-admission physician evaluation documents the patient’s status on admission and provides the rehabilitation physician with the necessary information to begin development of the patient’s overall plan of care.”

“The ongoing rehabilitation physician visits ensure that the patient’s medical status and functional status are being continuously monitored as the patient’s overall plan of care is being carried out, so that the patient can ultimately achieve his or her highest functional recovery. One of the requirements of the minimum three rehabilitation physician visits per week is to assess the patient’s functional goals and progress in light of the patient’s medical conditions,” the Medicare guidance continues. “We do not believe that a rehabilitation physician can do a meaningful assessment of the patient’s progress in light of the intensive rehabilitation therapy program before the patient has received at least one full day’s worth of intensive rehabilitation therapy.”

When asked for clarification of whether the rehabilitation physician’s interdisciplinary team conference note could serve as one of the minimum required three rehabilitation physician face-to-face visits per week, CMS responded: “No. The new IRF coverage requirements specify that there must be documentation of weekly interdisciplinary team meetings throughout the patient’s stay in the IRF and separate documentation of at least three face-to-face rehabilitation physician visits per week for the purpose of assessing the patient, both medically and functionally. These requirements cannot be combined.”

While some physicians indicate a separate face-to-face visit in the same note that records information from the team conference, we recommend that our clients avoid this practice and instead require the rehabilitation physician to document the team meeting information in a separate note from the face-to-face visit note. Because the two events occur at different times of the day, the notes would then clearly demonstrate separate date/time stamps and support the face-to-face encounter as a separate event.

What’s Unclear?

The individualized plan of care (IPOC) itself does not require a patient visit, and we believe it should not be considered a face-to-face visit. The Medicare Benefit Policy Manual notes that “information from the preadmission screening and the post-admission physician evaluation, together with other information garnered from the assessments of all therapy disciplines involved in treating the patient and other pertinent clinicians, will be synthesized by a rehabilitation physician to support a documented overall plan of care, including an estimated length of stay. The overall plan of care must detail the patient’s medical prognosis and the anticipated interventions, functional outcomes, and discharge destination from the IRF stay, thereby supporting the medical necessity of the admission. “ 

The plan itself is frequently documented in a separate template within the medical record, and it pulls together information from preadmission and early IRF assessments. This information must be completed by day four of the IRF admission. At times, this template is combined with or located within other documents – the history and physical, the team conference note, and in some organizations, within a daily visit note, for example.

While is highly likely that a face-to-face visit will be completed on the same day that the IPOC is recorded, there has been no specific Medicare clarification related to the IPOC and the face-to-face requirements. For this reason, we advise IRFs to create a separate note detailing the elements of the face-to-face visit.

Face-to-Face Note Content

The Medicare Benefits Manual describes the purpose of the face-to-face visits as “to assess the patient both medically and functionally (with an emphasis on the important interactions between the patient’s medical and functional goals and progress), as well as to modify the course of treatment as needed to maximize the patient’s capacity to benefit from the rehabilitation process.” As with any physician evaluation and management service, we would expect to see some level of examination, assessment, coordination, and treatment planning, and when completing our own audits of documentation, we’d look for the following components:

  • An examination of the patient’s status, including what is going on medically and functionally. Did the rehabilitation physician report status of medical issues, a physical exam, and a statement related to current function?
  • Assessment of the interplay between patient functional progress and the patient’s medical status and issues. For example, if a patient is making poor functional progress related to medical issues and management, did the physician address those issues?
  • When other physicians are also involved in the care of the patient, does the rehabilitation physician note test results, consultant recommendations, and the impact on rehabilitation?
  • When appropriate, is the plan modified consistent with the assessment findings?

Midlevel Practitioners and the Face-to-Face Note

When clarification was requested in this area, Medicare responded: “We have been asked whether a physician extender could conduct these visits, and the answer is no. They must be conducted by a licensed physician. Physician extenders generally work under the direction of a physician and can perform certain tasks as delegated by a physician, but the level of assessment we are expecting from the three physician visits outlined in this requirement is specifically to ensure that IRF patients receive more comprehensive assessments of their functional goals and progress in light of their medical conditions by a rehabilitation physician with the necessary training and experience to make these assessments.”

While we believe that rehabilitation physicians may utilize mid-level practitioners within the IRF, it is clear that the services provided by the mid-level would not count as meeting the face-to-face requirement. 

Our advice: to consider the visit as a physician face-to-face encounter, the note must clearly demonstrate that the physician performed sufficient services to meet the requirements for a split visit under physician billing, and that the portion of the evaluation and maintenance service performed and documented by the physician must be substantive, which includes part or all the history, exam, or medical decision-making. 

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Angela Phillips, PT

Angela M. Phillips, PT, is President & Chief Executive Officer of Images & Associates. A graduate of the University of Pennsylvania, School of Allied Health Professions, she has almost 45 years of experience as a consultant, healthcare executive, hospital administrator, educator, and clinician. Ms. Phillips is one of the nation’s leading consultants assisting Inpatient Rehabilitation Facilities in operating effectively under the Medicare Prospective Payment System (PPS) and in addressing key issues related to compliance.

Related Stories

Key Targets of the WISeR Program

In the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS’s) ongoing attempts to conquer fraud, waste, and abuse, it launched the WISeR (Wasteful and Inappropriate Service

Read More

Leave a Reply

Please log in to your account to comment on this article.

Featured Webcasts

Sepsis Sequencing in Focus: From Documentation to Defensible Coding

Sepsis sequencing continues to challenge even experienced coding and CDI professionals, with evolving guidelines, documentation gaps, and payer scrutiny driving denials and data inconsistencies. In this webcast, Payal Sinha, MBA, RHIA, CCDS, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, CCDS-O, CRC, CRCR, provides clear guideline-based strategies to accurately code sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock, assign POA indicators, clarify the relationship between infection and organ dysfunction, and align documentation across teams. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen audit defensibility, improve first-pass accuracy, support appeal success, reduce denials, and ensure accurate quality reporting, empowering organizations to achieve consistent, compliant sepsis coding outcomes.

March 26, 2026
I022426_SQUARE

Fracture Care Coding: Reduce Denials Through Accurate Coding, Sequencing, and Modifier Use

Expert presenters Kathy Pride, RHIT, CPC, CCS-P, CPMA, and Brandi Russell, RHIA, CCS, COC, CPMA, break down complex fracture care coding rules, walk through correct modifier application (-25, -57, 54, 55), and clarify sequencing for initial and subsequent encounters. Attendees will gain the practical knowledge needed to submit clean claims, ensure compliance, and stay one step ahead of payer audits in 2026.

February 24, 2026
Mastering Principal Diagnosis: Coding Precision, Medical Necessity, and Quality Impact

Mastering Principal Diagnosis: Coding Precision, Medical Necessity, and Quality Impact

Accurately determining the principal diagnosis is critical for compliant billing, appropriate reimbursement, and valid quality reporting — yet it remains one of the most subjective and error-prone areas in inpatient coding. In this expert-led session, Cheryl Ericson, RN, MS, CCDS, CDIP, demystifies the complexities of principal diagnosis assignment, bridging the gap between coding rules and clinical reality. Learn how to strengthen your organization’s coding accuracy, reduce denials, and ensure your documentation supports true medical necessity.

December 3, 2025

Proactive Denial Management: Data-Driven Strategies to Prevent Revenue Loss

Denials continue to delay reimbursement, increase administrative burden, and threaten financial stability across healthcare organizations. This essential webcast tackles the root causes—rising payer scrutiny, fragmented workflows, inconsistent documentation, and underused analytics—and offers proven, data-driven strategies to prevent and overturn denials. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen documentation and coding accuracy, engage clinicians effectively, and leverage predictive analytics and AI to identify risks before they impact revenue. Through real-world case examples and actionable guidance, this session empowers coding, CDI, and revenue cycle professionals to shift from reactive appeals to proactive denial prevention and revenue protection.

November 25, 2025

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

Mastering MDM for Accurate Professional Fee Coding

In this timely session, Stacey Shillito, CDIP, CPMA, CCS, CCS-P, CPEDC, COPC, breaks down the complexities of Medical Decision Making (MDM) documentation so providers can confidently capture the true complexity of their care. Attendees will learn practical, efficient strategies to ensure documentation aligns with current E/M guidelines, supports accurate coding, and reduces audit risk, all without adding to charting time.

March 31, 2026

The PEPPER Returns – Risk and Opportunity at Your Fingertips

Join Ronald Hirsch, MD, FACP, CHCQM for The PEPPER Returns – Risk and Opportunity at Your Fingertips, a practical webcast that demystifies the PEPPER and shows you how to turn complex claims data into actionable insights. Dr. Hirsch will explain how to interpret key measures, identify compliance risks, uncover missed revenue opportunities, and understand new updates in the PEPPER, all to help your organization stay ahead of audits and use this powerful data proactively.

March 19, 2026

Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue

Stay ahead of the 2026-2027 audit surge with “Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue,” a high-impact webcast led by Michael Calahan, PA, MBA. This concise session gives hospitals and physicians clear insight into the most likely federal audit targets, such as E/M services, split/shared and critical care, observation and admissions, device credits, and Two-Midnight Rule changes, and shows how to tighten documentation, coding, and internal processes to reduce denials, recoupments, and penalties. Attendees walk away with practical best practices to protect revenue, strengthen compliance, and better prepare their teams for inevitable audits.

January 29, 2026

AI in Claims Auditing: Turning Compliance Risks into Defensible Systems

As AI reshapes healthcare compliance, the risk of biased outputs and opaque decision-making grows. This webcast, led by Frank Cohen, delivers a practical Four-Pillar Governance Framework—Transparency, Accountability, Fairness, and Explainability—to help you govern AI-driven claim auditing with confidence. Learn how to identify and mitigate bias, implement robust human oversight, and document defensible AI review processes that regulators and auditors will accept. Discover concrete remedies, from rotation protocols to uncertainty scoring, and actionable steps to evaluate vendors before contracts are signed. In a regulatory landscape that moves faster than ever, gain the tools to stay compliant, defend your processes, and reduce liability while maintaining operational effectiveness.

January 13, 2026

Trending News

Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Decoding Social Admissions’ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 1 with code CYBER25

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24