The court ruled that the whistleblower’s complaint lacked credible allegations that any false claims were submitted to Medicare.
Last week, a federal Judge in the Middle District of Florida dismissed a lawsuit against electronic health record (EHR) giant Epic Systems. An EHR is a digital version, or database, of a patient’s paper charts. They allow for real-time sharing of patient-centered records – and, hopefully, better recordkeeping. While basic EHRs were only used at 9.4 percent of the nation’s hospitals in 2008, they were in almost 84 percent of hospitals in 2015.
The dismissal came with prejudice with respect to the whistleblower, effectively ending the matter, as the federal government had not intervened in the suit. The suit alleged that Epic Systems’ EHR caused hospitals to double-bill Medicare and Medicaid for anesthesia services. Epic Systems is the second-most popular EHR software on the market, behind only Cerner Corporation.
The whistleblower, Geraldine Petrowski, was a former compliance officer at a North Carolina hospital that used the software. She specifically alleged that Epic’s software was designed to double-bill as a result of a 2012 coding rule change with respect to anesthesiology services. On Jan. 1, 2012, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) changed its billing rules for anesthesiologists. Prior to 2012, anesthesiologist time was billed in 15-minute “base units.” Starting in 2012, CMS required that anesthesia services be billed for the actual time a physician spends on a procedure.
According to Petrowski, the Epic system billed for both actual time spent and equivalent base units, converting the base units into minutes and adding the two metrics together when generating a final bill. The complaint provided only one example of double-billing, at a hospital in Texas. In that case, a removal of a prostate was billed for 420 minutes, or seven hours, of anesthesiologist time. However, the anesthesia procedure summary noted that the whole surgery took less than five hours.
The Judge, James S. Moody Jr., ruled that the complaint did not “state with particularity the circumstance constituting the fraud” and lacked “some indicia of reliability.” Specifically, the ruling notes that Petrowski’s complaint lacked credible allegations that any false claims were submitted to Medicare, and it lacked any supporting details required (the “who, what, when, where”) to plead a violation of the False Claims Act. The court concluded that the complaint alleged that it was theoretically possible that Epic’s software could generate bills that resulted in double payment for anesthesia services, but that such fraud actually occurred was purely speculative.
The ruling comes at a time when several of Epic’s large competitors, eClinicalWorks and Allscripts, have their own legal woes. In May, eClinicalWorks (ECW) settled a False Claims Act case for $155 million. In that case, ECW allegedly misrepresented the capabilities of its software when the EHR was being tested for CMS certification. Healthcare providers that use CMS-certified EHR software qualify for incentive payments from CMS. Instead of developing software that met the relevant requirements, ECW allegedly designed software to pass the certification requirements without actually meeting the certification criteria. ECW also was accused of paying kickbacks to users in exchange for attestations by users that the software met the certifying criteria. The company is now facing a class-action lawsuit from its current and former customers over the same alleged inadequacies in their product.
Allscrips is also facing a class-action suit from its customers. A week after its software was the target of a massive cyberattack, its users are alleging that the strain of ransomware used, SamSam, has been a known threat since March 2016, and the company failed to adequately and reasonably guard against it.
While EHR programs are now a part of day-to-day life in the healthcare field, so is the potential for fraud and risk associated with the software. The vigilance of doctors, nurses, coders, and hospital employees will be essential in stemming the tide of risk and fraud in this area.
While the coverage of telehealth is definitely a good thing, it has caused needless confusion. I would like to address a little of that today.
Compliance teams get nervous when rules are not followed. And when an expired form is used, they get really nervous. Thankfully, there is one fewer
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
