“Admit as inpatient” are probably the most valuable words written or electronically entered by physicians. And to be honest, I think the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has a little too much psychological and physical dependence on these words.
Is a patient any less a patient because those three words are not on the chart? I don’t think so. Does it cost a hospital less to care for a patient if those three words are not on the chart? I know that’s not true. And does something magically happen to a patient when they leave the hospital if they had those three words on the chart, but they were not authenticated prior to discharge? They sure look the same when they leave. Yet this phrase is seems to be viewed by CMS as being even more important than anything else that happens to the patient.
This came up two weeks ago when a physician advisor asked how to status a patient who came into the emergency department with a heart attack. During cardiac catheterization the patient rapidly decompensated and required the placement of an intra-aortic balloon pump to maintain circulation – and actually, to keep them alive. The patient then was rapidly transferred to a larger hospital for specialized care.
But those silly doctors, in their rush to save a life, did not stop to consult addendum E of the Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS) Final Rule and see that an intra-aortic balloon pump is an inpatient-only surgery – and therefore, an inpatient admission order should have been written prior to the patient’s discharge.
As a result, the hospital is unable to bill for an inpatient admission; it must bill an outpatient stay and get paid a much lower outpatient rate for saving that patient’s life. In fact, since the patient underwent a cardiac catheterization and the balloon pump procedure, by outpatient bundling rules (only one SI = J1 procedure is paid), the hospital will get no money beyond the payment for the catheterization.
But can’t the hospital explain that the patient was dying, and patient care should come first? Well, that sounds good, but the example CMS gives for the extremely rare situation when billing with a missing or defective order is a patient who has emergent open-heart surgery and spends several days at the hospital – not the patient who never even gets to an inpatient bed, but underwent an inpatient-only surgery.
One case management director recently stated that his hospital’s write-offs of inpatient-only surgeries without admission orders is a constant problem, since the surgery booked by the surgeon and the actual surgery performed often differ just slightly and result in a new code and a different required status. And if that status was inpatient, the hospital is out of luck and gets no payment.
And why the requirement to authenticate a verbal admission order prior to discharge? That also has no logical explanation. The patient was formally admitted as inpatient, received inpatient care, and was discharged. Yet the lack of a simple signature potentially costs the hospital tens of thousands of dollars.
I can’t explain why these three words mean so much. I know it is outlined in the Social Security Act and federal regulations, and but it just feels good to be able to go on Monitor Mondays and suggest to CMS and Congress that they just get beyond it.
With little fanfare, last week the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced another Review Choice Demonstration Project. Joining the ongoing Review Choice Demonstration
Last week I wrote about the ongoing issue of Medicare Advantage (MA) denials related to appropriate transfer to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) and the
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
Dr. Ronald Hirsch provides tried-and-true strategies and insight into outpatient in hospital bed stays including determining the applicable definition, who uses it, and when and how to bill for this circumstance, solidified with concrete case examples and expert insight.
Practical solutions for CDM departments to protect your hospital’s revenue.
This webcast teaches hospitals how to comply with CMS price transparency rules and compare their rates with peer hospitals. It covers creating a compliant machine-readable file, comparing negotiated rates, and improving pricing decisions.
The No Surprises Act (NSA) presents a challenge for hospitals and providers who must provide Good Faith Estimates (GFEs) for all schedulable services for self-pay and uninsured patients. Compliance is necessary, but few hospitals have been able to fully comply with the requirements despite being a year into the NSA. This webcast provides an overview of the NSA/GFE policy, its impact, and a step-by-step process to adhere to the requirements and avoid non-compliance penalties.
This expert-guided webcast will showcase tips for providers to ensure appropriate capture of the work performed for a visit. Comprehensive examples will be given that demonstrate documentation gaps and how to educate providers on the documentation necessary to appropriately assign a level of service. You will gain clarification on answers regarding emergency department and urgent care coding circumstances as well as a review of how/when it is appropriate to code for E&M in radiology and more.
Set yourself up for financial and compliance success with expert guidance that breaks down the impactful changes including MS-DRG methodology, surgical hierarchy updates, and many new technology add-on payments (NTAPs). Identify areas of potential challenge ahead of time and master solutions for all 2024 Proposed IPPS changes.
Do you struggle with selecting and appending the correct modifier for your medical claims? Join our must-attend webinar, “Mastering Modifier Usage: Preventing Denials and Ensuring Compliance” to reduce claim denials and improve your reimbursement rates.
Kay Piper reviews the guidance and updates coders and CDISs on important information in the AHA’s fourth quarter 2023 ICD-10-CM/PCS Quarterly Coding Clinic in an easy to access on-demand webcast.
Copyright © 2023 RACmonitor. Powered by MedLearn Media.
