government

CMS wants input on new self-referral rules

The comment period, which ends Jan. 25, could lead to further guidance for restructuring noncompliant physician-hospital arrangements.

By Amy Lynn Sorrel — Posted Jan. 20, 2010

Print  |   Email  |   Respond  |   Reprints  |   Like Facebook  |   Share Twitter  |   Tweet Linkedin

CORRECTION: Do to a computational error by American Medical News, this article incorrectly stated the deadline for comments. The deadline was Dec. 29, 2009. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has the discretion to accept late comments, but it only assures review of those submitted by the official deadline. American Medical News regrets the error.

Physicians have until Jan. 25 to comment on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' recent changes to federal anti-self-referral rules that have forced many physician-hospital arrangements to fold or restructure.

The federal Stark law generally prohibits physicians from referring patients to entities in which they have a financial stake. In a final rule that took effect Oct. 1, 2009, CMS instituted broad revisions that interpret an entity to include not only the party that directly bills Medicare for designated health services, but also those providing the services. Under the change, physician groups are considered to have a direct ownership stake in the designated health services they perform, barring referrals unless they can meet stricter Stark exceptions.

The changes stemmed from the government's fears that the self-referral rules were too lenient and promoted abusive arrangements that could lead to improper referrals and overutilization of services. But many physician organizations, including the American Medical Association, expressed concern about certain ambiguities in the rule change and its impact on legitimate arrangements and patient care.

In response, CMS, in its Nov. 24, 2009, publication of the 2010 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, began soliciting comments "to determine the need for further guidance" on the issue. The agency is asking for input on whether CMS should define or clarify what it means for a physician-owned entity or its employees to be performing designated health services under certain arrangements.

CMS also will consider:

  • Whether inpatient and outpatient services should be regarded differently.
  • The impact of services provided by nonphysicians.
  • The role of space and equipment leases and billing practices.

In addition, physicians and others may comment on potential alternative approaches or criteria that would address CMS' policy concerns, while limiting the impact on non-abusive arrangements.

Back to top


ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISE HERE


Featured
Read story

Confronting bias against obese patients

Medical educators are starting to raise awareness about how weight-related stigma can impair patient-physician communication and the treatment of obesity. Read story


Read story

Goodbye

American Medical News is ceasing publication after 55 years of serving physicians by keeping them informed of their rapidly changing profession. Read story


Read story

Policing medical practice employees after work

Doctors can try to regulate staff actions outside the office, but they must watch what they try to stamp out and how they do it. Read story


Read story

Diabetes prevention: Set on a course for lifestyle change

The YMCA's evidence-based program is helping prediabetic patients eat right, get active and lose weight. Read story


Read story

Medicaid's muddled preventive care picture

The health system reform law promises no-cost coverage of a lengthy list of screenings and other prevention services, but some beneficiaries still might miss out. Read story


Read story

How to get tax breaks for your medical practice

Federal, state and local governments offer doctors incentives because practices are recognized as economic engines. But physicians must know how and where to find them. Read story


Read story

Advance pay ACOs: A down payment on Medicare's future

Accountable care organizations that pay doctors up-front bring practice improvements, but it's unclear yet if program actuaries will see a return on investment. Read story


Read story

Physician liability: Your team, your legal risk

When health care team members drop the ball, it's often doctors who end up in court. How can physicians improve such care and avoid risks? Read story

  • Stay informed
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn