A decision last week by a Federal Appeals Court could impact the False Claims Act.
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers states in the middle part of the country from Minnesota and the Dakotas down to Missouri and Arkansas, concluded that to prevail in a False Claims Act (FCA) case, the relator/government must show that the bills in question would not have been submitted to the government “but for” the kickback. The relator in the case (United States ex rel. Cairns v. D.S. Medical, LLC, 2022 WL 2930946 [8th Cir. July 26, 2022]) asserted that kickbacks paid by a device company to a physician meant that any bill for a service performed by that physician involving the device were false. The plaintiff’s theory, in essence, was “Once there is a kickback, the work of the physician related to the kickback is tainted. The trial court agreed, and the physician lost at trial. But the Eighth circuit reversed, ruling that for the government to prevail in this sort of case, it must prove that “but for” the alleged kickback, the claim in question would not have been submitted.
The case is an interpreting of a sentence from 2010 Amendments to the False Claims Act that says that “A claim that includes items or services resulting from a violation of the Anti-kickback Statute constitutes a false claim.” The case is interpreting the phrase “resulting from.” The Eighth Circuit concluded that the phrase “resulting from” should be interpreted as meaning that if the kickback would not have occurred, the claim would not have been submitted. This interpretation greatly narrows the sorts of kickback cases than can result in false claims. It’s relatively common to have situations where a physician is going to perform a particular procedure and the only question is whether they will use product A or product B. For example, imagine that a physician has decided that a patient requires a knee replacement. There are a variety of implants available. If “Knees R Us” has paid the physician a kickback, and the physician uses their implant rather than one by a different vendor, the bill to Medicare will be the same. The knee replacement will be paid based on a DRG if done as in inpatient, or under the ASC fee schedule or an APC if done in an ASC or outpatient hospital setting. The Eighth Circuit is saying that with those facts, there is no liability under the FCA. I want to stress that this does not legalize kickbacks. Under these facts, the physician could still be criminally prosecuted. But the court is making an important distinction between criminal cases and false claims act cases, noting that if the government didn’t pay more money than it would have absent the kickback, there should not be liability under the FCA. Given the extreme financial penalties associated with the FCA, such a result makes a lot of sense.
The bottom line is that while there might still be criminal liability for the kickback, at least in the Eighth Circuit, when a kickback results in a physician choosing a particular product that is bundled in the cost of a procedure that they were going to perform anyway, there is no false claim. This question likely to be hotly contested because Third Circuit reached the opposite conclusion in United States ex rel. Greenfield v. MedCo Health Solutions. The Third Circuit covers Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware and the Virgin Islands.
So, what does this mean? In at least some parts of the country it will be much harder for someone to bring a False Claims Act case in situations where a kickback may have encouraged a physician to choose a drug or device, but there was no over-utilization of services. In addition, this may be a question that goes to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court chooses what cases it will take, but it often takes significant issues when there is a dispute between the appeals courts.
This is certainly a decision which can have large financial implications, so it is very possible that this issue will someday be addressed by the high court.
Programming Note: Listen to healthcare attorney David Glaser’s Risky Business segment every Monday on Monitor Mondays.
The 60-day Refund Rule, created by the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), requires providers to report and return Medicare and Medicaid overpayments
A recent federal court decision coming out of New Jersey demonstrates the viability of an unusual kind of whistleblower: a privately defrauded party. The most
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
ICD10monitor has teamed up with renowned CDI expert Dr. Erica Remer to bring you an exclusive webcast on how to recognize sepsis, how to get providers to give documentation that will support sepsis, and how to educate to avert sepsis denials. Register now and become a crucial piece of the solution to standardizing sepsis clinical practice, documentation, and coding at your facility.
Optimize your inpatient clinical documentation and gain comprehensive knowledge from foundational practices to advanced technologies, ensuring improved patient care and organizational and financial success. This webcast bundle provides a holistic approach to CDI, empowering you to implement best practices from the ground up and leverage advanced strategies for superior results. Participants will gain actionable insights to improve documentation quality, patient care, compliance, and financial outcomes.
Join expert Angela Comfort, MBA, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P., as she helps you navigate advanced inpatient CDI technologies, regulatory changes, and system interoperability. Angela will provide actionable strategies for integrating AI and predictive analytics into CDI practices, ensuring seamless system interoperability, and maintaining compliance with evolving regulations. Attendees will learn to select and implement advanced EHR systems and CDI software, leverage data analytics to enhance documentation accuracy, and stay audit-ready with the latest compliance updates. Real-world case studies and practical tools will empower you to drive continuous improvement in CDI, improve patient outcomes, and enhance organizational efficiency. Don’t miss this opportunity to advance your CDI practices and stay ahead in this dynamic field.
Join expert Angela Comfort, MBA, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, for an insightful webcast on improving inpatient clinical documentation integrity (CDI). Inaccurate documentation can lead to misdiagnosis, improper treatment, and compromised patient safety. High workloads, lack of standardized practices, and outdated EHR systems contribute to these issues, affecting care quality and financial outcomes. Angela will offer practical strategies and tools to enhance accuracy, consistency, and timeliness in documentation. Attendees will learn to use standardized templates, checklists, and advanced EHR systems, while staying compliant with regulations. Improve patient care, ensure accurate billing, and reduce audit risks with actionable insights from this essential webcast.
This webcast, presented by Tiffany Ferguson, LMSW, CMAC, ACM, addresses the critical gap in Social Determinants of Health (SDoH) reporting for pediatric populations. While SDoH efforts often focus on adults, this session emphasizes the unique needs of children. Attendees will gain insights into the current state of SDoH, new pediatric Z-codes, and the importance of interdisciplinary collaboration. By understanding and applying pediatric-specific SDoH factors, healthcare professionals can improve data capture, compliance, and care outcomes. This webcast is essential for those looking to enhance their approach to pediatric SDoH reporting and coding.
Join Becky Jacobsen, BSN, RN, MBS, CCS-P, CPC, CPEDC, CBCS, CEMC, VP of CDM, for a webcast addressing oncology service coding challenges. Learn to navigate coding for infusions and injections alongside Evaluation and Management (E/M) services, ensuring compliance and accurate reimbursement. Gain insights into documenting E/M services for oncology patients and determining medical necessity. This webcast is essential to optimize coding practices, maintain compliance, and maximize revenue in oncology care.
During this webcast Dr. Ronald Hirsch delves into the inpatient admission order process including when to get it, when it becomes effective, its impact on billing and payment, who can write it, how to cancel it, the effects on the beneficiary, and more. You’ll leave with a clear understanding of inpatient orders and guidelines for handling improper orders that you can implement immediately.
Michelle Wieczorek explores challenges, strategies, and best practices to AI implementation and ongoing monitoring in the middle revenue cycle through real-world use cases. She addresses critical issues such as the validation of AI algorithms, the importance of human validation in machine learning, and the delineation of responsibilities between buyers and vendors.
Copyright © 2024 RACmonitor. Powered by MedLearn Media.
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 →
