When is an ambulance a non-emergency ride?
Apparently, the government has already started enforcement of the No Surprises Act (NSA.) One of my clients was contacted a couple of weeks ago, accused of failing to give a good faith estimate (GFE). There are several things worth discussing.
First, the patient in question called on a Friday to schedule an appointment for the following Wednesday. A GFE is required when the patient schedules a visit at least three business days before the date the item is to be furnished. Counting days is often a challenge. Do you count the day on which the visit was scheduled? Do you count the day the patient calls? The regulation says that the GFE is needed when the appointment is scheduled at least three business days before the date the event is scheduled.
Now, the way I would count, you need three full business days. That would mean Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, so no GFE was required. The government disagrees. They would count the Friday, Monday and Tuesday. The government’s position is that if a visit scheduled at 4:59 pm (or 11:59 pm) on a day, that still counts as a full business day during which the entity could have been preparing the estimate. It’s an interesting question as to whether they’re correct. I guess we will find out.
The government, which is using contractors from the consulting company KPMG to conduct this investigation, seems to be threatening to impose penalties. This is another interesting question. The No Surprises Act Statute includes potential penalties of up to $10,000 per violation. However, the government has not yet issued any regulations about how to implement the penalty provision. Moreover, the statute indicates that the federal government is supposed to impose penalties only after making a finding that the state has failed to enforce the provisions. So, does the federal government currently have the authority to fine my client? Once again, I guess we will see.
My firm, Fredrikson and Byron, does free monthly webinars, and the April webinar addresses common question under the No Surprises Act. You can see it here. Among the topics covered is the fact that the drafters failed to understand the difference between the conjunctions “and” and “or.” In third grade, most of us learned that “and” pairs things, while “or” offers alternatives. In the immortal words of Schoolhouse Rock, “because ‘and’ that’s an additive like ‘this and that’, then there’s ‘or’ when you have a choice like ‘this or that.’” Apparently, the individuals who wrote the rules didn’t watch their morning cartoons (or pay careful attention in English class!)
For example, the government asserts that if a patient uses an ambulance to transfer from one hospital to another, it’s impossible to ask the patient to consent to be balance billed. But the regulation permits balance billing if the physician treating the patient feels that the enrollee can travel using non-medical transportation or non-emergency medical transportation.
An ambulance is only emergency medical transportation when it has its lights and siren on. When it drives normally it is non-emergency medical transportation. If the authors of the regulation wanted to restrict transfers to patients who could go via car, they should have stopped after the phrase “non-medical transportation.” Adding the “or non-emergency medical transportation” means it’s entirely possible to use an ambulance for the transfer. In fact, as soon as the sentence includes an “or” it can be labelled as poorly drafted because if the patient meets the lower of the two tests, the regulation is satisfied. You will never see a sign that says “you can only ride if you are at least 5 or 6 feet tall” because the reference to six feet is extraneous.
Unfortunately, this is only one of the illustrations of the drafting errors in the regulations. Hopefully as the government begins enforcement, it will avoid inquiry in areas where its regulations are poorly crafted.
Programming Note: Listen to healthcare attorney David Glaser and his “Risky Business” segment every Monday on Monitor Mondays at 10 Eastern.
A Monitor Monday listener recently sent word of what can only be described as a deeply troubling denial of a gender reassignment surgery. The listener
Physician advisors can serve as a trusted resource for any EMTALA concerns.
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
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.
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.
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.
Get clear, practical answers to Medicare’s most confusing regulations. Join Dr. Ronald Hirsch as he breaks down real-world compliance challenges and shares guidance your team can apply right away.
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.
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
