No Surprises Act Surprises No One

Although the Biden Administration claims this is the final regulation, there is evidence more is yet to come.

The Biden administration released the final No Surprises Act regulation recently but advised healthcare professionals that this final version is not the final one and promised more to come. The latest final rule was narrowly focused on just the arbitration process between payers and providers who might disagree with a reimbursement for a No Surprises Act out-of-network claim.

That arbitration process is called the Independent Dispute Resolution process, or IDR, and, how the reimbursement is decided in the IDR process and how that might have significant consequences not just on all out-of-network claims, but also on provider contracts and on healthcare reimbursement more generally.

The final rule recently released, concerns itself with only three issues. One, wow should the arbitrators or IDR entities determine the best reimbursement for No Surprises Act claims? Two, what should the written decisions from those IDR entities say? Three, what needs to happen if a payer downcodes a submitted claim to lower payment to the provider?

First, under last year’s No Surprises Act final rule, IDR entities were to assume or presume that the plan’s median in-network rate was the appropriate or default rate, and providers would have to bring substantive evidence that they deserved anything more than the median in-network rate.

A Texas District Court threw that methodology out this past February and, now, the final rule is aligned with the Texas court’s decision.  The rule now says that all factors — seven in all — need to be considered and that the IDR entity should choose the reimbursement that best reflects the value of the healthcare service.

Now, there were seven lawsuits brought by providers on precisely this issue; those lawsuits were put on hold, pending this rule. Ostensibly, then, with the release of this rule, the providers have won, and the American Hospital Association and others will drop those lawsuits.  

However, the administration is now requiring that the IDR entities consider the plan’s median network rate first, before looking at other factors, when considering appropriate reimbursement. In other words, the implication is that, although the median in network rate won’t be the default rate, there is the implication that all other factors will be weighed against the median in-network rate which serves as a kind of benchmark. So, we’ll have to see if the lawsuits are dropped or not.

Second issue in the final rule: It broadened the information that should be in the IDR Entity’s written decisions for every IDR determination, including what weight was given to the plan’s median in-network rate. In other words, here’s that car dealer asking why you didn’t like the first car.

The third issue in the rule focused on downcoding, which was defined as payers changing the service code or modifiers when initially paying a No Surprises Act claim.

The latest rule requires plan to notify providers that they are downcoding and include both the reason for that downcoding and what the median in-network rate would have been if they hadn’t downcoded.

For additional information, please refer to the links below.

Programming note: Listen to the Monitor Mondays Legislative Update every Monday, 10 Eastern, sponsored by Zelis Health.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Matthew Albright

Matthew Albright is the chief legislative affairs officer at Zelis Healthcare. Previously, Albright was senior manager at CAQH CORE, and earlier, he was the acting deputy director of the Office of E-Health and Services for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

Related Stories

Leave a Reply

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

Featured Webcasts

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 19, 2025
Sepsis: Bridging the Clinical Documentation and Coding Gap to Reduce Denials

Sepsis: Bridging the Clinical Documentation and Coding Gap to Reduce Denials

Sepsis remains one of the most frequently denied and contested diagnoses, creating costly revenue loss and compliance risks. In this webcast, Angela Comfort, DBA, MBA, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, provides practical, real-world strategies to align documentation with coding guidelines, reconcile Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 definitions, and apply compliant queries. You’ll learn how to identify and address documentation gaps, strengthen provider engagement, and defend diagnoses against payer scrutiny—equipping you to protect reimbursement, improve SOI/ROM capture, and reduce audit vulnerability in this high-risk area.

September 24, 2025

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

Surviving Federal Audits for Inpatient Rehab Facility Services

Surviving Federal Audits for Inpatient Rehab Facility Services

Federal auditors are zeroing in on Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility (IRF) and hospital rehab unit services, with OIG and CERT audits leading to millions in penalties—often due to documentation and administrative errors, not quality of care. Join compliance expert Michael Calahan, PA, MBA, to learn the five clinical “pillars” of IRF-PPS admissions, key documentation requirements, and real-life case lessons to help protect your revenue.

November 13, 2025
E/M Services Under Intensive Federal Scrutiny: Navigating Split/Shared, Incident-to & Critical Care Compliance in 2025-2026

E/M Services Under Intensive Federal Scrutiny: Navigating Split/Shared, Incident-to & Critical Care Compliance in 2025-2026

During this essential RACmonitor webcast Michael Calahan, PA, MBA Certified Compliance Officer, will clarify the rules, dispel common misconceptions, and equip you with practical strategies to code, document, and bill high-risk split/shared, incident-to & critical care E/M services with confidence. Don’t let audit risks or revenue losses catch your organization off guard — learn exactly what federal auditors are looking for and how to ensure your documentation and reporting stand up to scrutiny.

August 26, 2025

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. 2 with code CYBER24