2006 proposed fee schedule - American Society of Clinical Oncology
2006 proposed fee schedule - American Society of Clinical Oncology 2006 proposed fee schedule - American Society of Clinical Oncology
146 beginning in 2003 as “a geographic entity associated with at least one core of 10,000 or more population, plus adjacent territory that has a high degree of social and economic integration with the core as measured by commuting ties.” The standards designate and define two categories of CBSAs: MSAs and Micropolitan Statistical Areas (65 FR 82235). According to OMB, MSAs are based on urbanized areas of 50,000 or more population, and Micropolitan Statistical Areas (referred to hereafter as Micropolitan Areas) are based on urban clusters with at least 10,000, but less than 50,000 population. Counties that do not fall within CBSAs are deemed “Outside CBSAs”. Previously OMB defined MSAs around areas with a minimum core population of 50,000, and smaller areas were “Outside MSAs”. On June 6, 2003 OMB announced the new CBSAs, consisting of MSAs and the new Micropolitan Areas based on the results of the 2000 Census. d. Adoption of MSAs as Urban Areas for Composite Payments In its June 6, 2003 announcement, OMB cautioned that its new metropolitan area definitions “should not be used to develop and implement Federal, State, and local nonstatistical programs and policies without full consideration of the effects of using these definitions for these purposes. These areas should not serve as a general purpose geographic framework for nonstatistical activities,
and they may or may not be suitable for use in program funding formulas.” 147 We point out that Medicare’s PPSs, including the ESRD composite payment rate, historically have used the metropolitan area definitions developed by OMB. While the hospital IPPS is the most significant of these, the OMB geographic designations are also used to define labor market areas for purposes of recognizing area differences in labor costs under the SNF, inpatient rehabilitation, IPFs, and home health PPSs. In discussing the adoption of the OMB geographic designation for the IPPS area labor adjustment, the FY 1985 IPPS proposed rule published July 3, 1984 (49 FR 27426) noted as follows: “[i]n administering a national payment system, we must have a national classification system built on clear, objective standards. Otherwise the program becomes increasingly difficult to administer because the distinction between rural and urban hospitals is blurred. We believe that the MSA system (developed by OMB) is the only one that currently meets the requirements for use as a classification system in a national payment program. The MSA classification system is a statistical standard developed for use by Federal agencies in the production, analysis, and publication of data on metropolitan areas. The standards have been developed with the aim of producing definitions that will be as consistent as possible for all MSAs nationwide.” The logic represented in the statement above still applies today. The process used by OMB to develop the geographic designations resulted in the creation of geographic locales that we believe also reflect the characteristics of unified labor market areas. The CBSAs
- Page 95 and 96: specialties listed infrequently as
- Page 97 and 98: for premium rating purposes. ISO co
- Page 99 and 100: psychology to the nonsurgical risk
- Page 101 and 102: to anesthesiology which is 2.84 rat
- Page 103 and 104: 103 However, as noted previously in
- Page 105 and 106: ● Category #1: Services that are
- Page 107 and 108: G0270, G0271 and 97802 through 9780
- Page 109 and 110: Group Medical Nutritional Therapy (
- Page 111 and 112: 111 furnished in the group setting
- Page 113 and 114: CMS Review 113 As noted previously,
- Page 115 and 116: system that permits the physician a
- Page 117 and 118: 117 associated with the provided se
- Page 119 and 120: 119 overlapping surgeries, the teac
- Page 121 and 122: anesthesia programs that have arran
- Page 123 and 124: 123 Section 623 of the MMA also req
- Page 125 and 126: 125 hospital-based facilities; whil
- Page 127 and 128: 127 The next step would be to devel
- Page 129 and 130: Drugs Second Quarter ASP +6 Percent
- Page 131 and 132: 131 independent facilities, to acco
- Page 133 and 134: 133
- Page 135 and 136: distributed this over a total proje
- Page 137 and 138: 137 additional 0.7 percent addition
- Page 139 and 140: 139 billed drugs regardless of sett
- Page 141 and 142: 141 than 0.9000 are paid more than
- Page 143 and 144: adoption of the new hospital wage i
- Page 145: of geographic designations for purp
- Page 149 and 150: the Medicare Geographic Classificat
- Page 151 and 152: (2) Metropolitan Divisions Under OM
- Page 153 and 154: 153 applying revised composite paym
- Page 155 and 156: ased on the labor components establ
- Page 157 and 158: 157 actual cost structure faced by
- Page 159 and 160: 159 ESRD facilities is 53.711, as s
- Page 161 and 162: from the cost reports. To avoid dou
- Page 163 and 164: from Worksheet A. The resulting mar
- Page 165 and 166: (1) Hospital Data Used In this prop
- Page 167 and 168: wage data ended. However, since the
- Page 169 and 170: approach to phasing-in the proposed
- Page 171 and 172: facilities that would receive lower
- Page 173 and 174: 173 wage index values and then simu
- Page 175 and 176: 175 Because Neighborhood Dialysis C
- Page 177 and 178: 177 detected through our receipt of
- Page 179 and 180: 179 CBSA Code Urban Area Wage (Cons
- Page 181 and 182: 181 CBSA Code Urban Area Wage (Cons
- Page 183 and 184: 183 CBSA Code Urban Area Wage (Cons
- Page 185 and 186: 185 CBSA Code Urban Area Wage (Cons
- Page 187 and 188: 187 CBSA Code Urban Area Wage (Cons
- Page 189 and 190: 189 CBSA Code Urban Area Wage (Cons
- Page 191 and 192: 191 CBSA Code Urban Area Wage (Cons
- Page 193 and 194: 193 CBSA Code Urban Area Wage (Cons
- Page 195 and 196: 195 CBSA Code Urban Area Wage (Cons
146<br />
beginning in 2003 as “a geographic entity associated with at<br />
least one core <strong>of</strong> 10,000 or more population, plus adjacent<br />
territory that has a high degree <strong>of</strong> social and economic<br />
integration with the core as measured by commuting ties.”<br />
The standards designate and define two categories <strong>of</strong> CBSAs:<br />
MSAs and Micropolitan Statistical Areas (65 FR 82235).<br />
According to OMB, MSAs are based on urbanized areas <strong>of</strong><br />
50,000 or more population, and Micropolitan Statistical<br />
Areas (referred to hereafter as Micropolitan Areas) are<br />
based on urban clusters with at least 10,000, but less than<br />
50,000 population. Counties that do not fall within CBSAs<br />
are deemed “Outside CBSAs”. Previously OMB defined MSAs<br />
around areas with a minimum core population <strong>of</strong> 50,000, and<br />
smaller areas were “Outside MSAs”. On June 6, 2003 OMB<br />
announced the new CBSAs, consisting <strong>of</strong> MSAs and the new<br />
Micropolitan Areas based on the results <strong>of</strong> the 2000 Census.<br />
d. Adoption <strong>of</strong> MSAs as Urban Areas for Composite Payments<br />
In its June 6, 2003 announcement, OMB cautioned that<br />
its new metropolitan area definitions “should not be used to<br />
develop and implement Federal, State, and local<br />
nonstatistical programs and policies without full<br />
consideration <strong>of</strong> the effects <strong>of</strong> using these definitions for<br />
these purposes. These areas should not serve as a general<br />
purpose geographic framework for nonstatistical activities,