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
2006) including the 8.9 percent drug add-on amount to 350 spending under current payments for drugs with the current drug add-on of 8.7 percent. In order to make column 5 comparable with rest of Table 38, current composite rate payments to ESRD facilities were included in both current and proposed spending calculations. We did not simulate any case mix in this impact table because 2004 claims data do not include the new data fields (height and weight) that are needed to calculate case mix. These data fields were not required be reported by providers until January 1, 2005. However, we have not proposed any changes to case mix for calendar year 2006. Column 6 shows the overall effect of all changes in drug and composite rate payments to ESRD providers. The overall effect is measured as the difference between proposed payment with all MMA changes as proposed in this rule and current payment. Proposed payment is computed by multiplying the composite rate for each provider (with both the proposed wage index and the 8.9 percent drug add-on) times dialysis treatments from 2004. In addition, the proposed payment includes payments for separately billable drugs under the ASP +6 drug pricing inflated to 2006 levels. Current payment is the current wage adjusted composite rate for each provider times dialysis treatments from 2004 claims
plus current AAP priced drug payments for separately billable drugs with the current 8.7 percent drug add-on. The overall impact to ESRD providers in aggregate is 0.5 percent. Among the two separately shown effects, the 351 effect of changes to the wage index has the most variation among provider type but is budget neutral in aggregate. The effect of change in drug payments contributes most to the overall effect, but varies little among provider types. We also note that the proposed revisions to the composite rate exceptions process will have no impact on payments to ESRD providers since we have only proposed changes in process and these changes do not affect which providers will be eligible for exceptions nor the amount of the exception. F. Payment for Covered Outpatient Drugs and Biologicals As discussed in section II.H. of this proposed rule, the proposal to pay a reduced supplying fee for each Medicare Part B oral drug prescription, after the first one, supplied to a beneficiary during a month is estimated to reduce total Federal expenditures by $8 million in 2006, and $30 million over the five-year period, CY 2006 to 2010. The preamble seeks comment on an appropriate inhalation drug dispensing fee amount for 2006. The effect on Federal expenditures of a potential change to the inhalation drug
- Page 299 and 300: we would resolve any doubt on the m
- Page 301 and 302: facility payment rather than a TC c
- Page 303 and 304: ventures and leases, pose a risk of
- Page 305 and 306: 305 Underlying the projected rate r
- Page 307 and 308: decisions are central to the health
- Page 309 and 310: however. We are particularly intere
- Page 311 and 312: The collection requirement in this
- Page 313 and 314: eporting requirements are discussed
- Page 315 and 316: IV. Response to Comments Because of
- Page 317 and 318: achieve the objectives with less si
- Page 319 and 320: 319 The analysis and discussion pro
- Page 321 and 322: 321 for a new code may change becau
- Page 323 and 324: 323 TABLE 30--Impact of Practice Ex
- Page 325 and 326: hour for these specialties. As note
- Page 327 and 328: Both physical/occupational therapy
- Page 329 and 330: 329 proposing to add cardiology cat
- Page 331 and 332: Speciality Impact of Removing Aberr
- Page 333 and 334: Family TABLE 32--Impact of Multiple
- Page 335 and 336: 335 column includes the current est
- Page 337 and 338: Specialty Medicare Allowed Charges
- Page 339 and 340: 339 Non-Facility Facility % % HCPCS
- Page 341 and 342: 341 have undertaken a similar analy
- Page 343 and 344: of the updated GPCI data. For the R
- Page 345 and 346: C. Medicare Telehealth Services In
- Page 347 and 348: 347 TABLE 37--Impact of Proposed Ch
- Page 349: 349 of the increase to the drug add
- Page 353 and 354: 353 the center up to what it would
- Page 355 and 356: satisfies the requirements of the i
- Page 357 and 358: 357 certainty the extent of these s
- Page 359 and 360: delivery arrangements and would hel
- Page 361 and 362: List of Subjects 42 CFR Part 405 Ad
- Page 363 and 364: (including by refunding amounts in
- Page 365 and 366: (2) Any financial incentives provid
- Page 367 and 368: 7. The authority citation for part
- Page 369 and 370: * * * * * PART 413--PRINCIPLES OF R
- Page 371 and 372: 371 D. Redesignating paragraphs (l)
- Page 373 and 374: 373 (3) The additional nursing hour
- Page 375 and 376: cost components relating to trainin
- Page 377 and 378: CAPD and CCPD) when the facility ac
- Page 379 and 380: Indirect Sales means from the manuf
- Page 381 and 382: amount for the quarter to the neare
- Page 383 and 384: 383 25. The heading for Part 426 is
- Page 385 and 386: 385 (Catalog of Federal Domestic As
- Page 387 and 388: 1. CPT/HCPCS code. This is the CPT
- Page 389 and 390: grace period. This indicator is no
- Page 391 and 392: 5. Physician work RVUs. These are t
- Page 393 and 394: ADDENDUM B: RELATIVE VALUE UNITS (R
- Page 395 and 396: ADDENDUM B: RELATIVE VALUE UNITS (R
- Page 397 and 398: ADDENDUM B: RELATIVE VALUE UNITS (R
- Page 399 and 400: ADDENDUM B: RELATIVE VALUE UNITS (R
plus current AAP priced drug payments for separately<br />
billable drugs with the current 8.7 percent drug add-on.<br />
The overall impact to ESRD providers in aggregate is<br />
0.5 percent. Among the two separately shown effects, the<br />
351<br />
effect <strong>of</strong> changes to the wage index has the most variation<br />
among provider type but is budget neutral in aggregate. The<br />
effect <strong>of</strong> change in drug payments contributes most to the<br />
overall effect, but varies little among provider types.<br />
We also note that the <strong>proposed</strong> revisions to the<br />
composite rate exceptions process will have no impact on<br />
payments to ESRD providers since we have only <strong>proposed</strong><br />
changes in process and these changes do not affect which<br />
providers will be eligible for exceptions nor the amount <strong>of</strong><br />
the exception.<br />
F. Payment for Covered Outpatient Drugs and Biologicals<br />
As discussed in section II.H. <strong>of</strong> this <strong>proposed</strong> rule,<br />
the proposal to pay a reduced supplying <strong>fee</strong> for each<br />
Medicare Part B oral drug prescription, after the first one,<br />
supplied to a beneficiary during a month is estimated to<br />
reduce total Federal expenditures by $8 million in <strong>2006</strong>, and<br />
$30 million over the five-year period, CY <strong>2006</strong> to 2010. The<br />
preamble seeks comment on an appropriate inhalation drug<br />
dispensing <strong>fee</strong> amount for <strong>2006</strong>. The effect on Federal<br />
expenditures <strong>of</strong> a potential change to the inhalation drug