Notice: This CMS-approved document has been submitted - Philips ...

Notice: This CMS-approved document has been submitted - Philips ... Notice: This CMS-approved document has been submitted - Philips ...

healthcare.philips.com
from healthcare.philips.com More from this publisher
19.02.2013 Views

CMS-1403-FC Physician A furnishes at least 75 percent of her services through Physician Organization B, and furnishes 25 percent of her professional services through Physician C and Laboratory Supplier D. Under this example, Physician A would be considered to be sharing a practice with Physician Organization B. Revised §414.50(a)(2)(ii) provides that the “substantially all” requirement is satisfied if the billing physician or other supplier has a reasonable belief, when submitting a claim, that: (1) the performing physician has furnished substantially all of his or her professional services through the billing physician or other supplier for the period of 12 months prior to and including the month in which the service was performed; or (2) the performing physician will furnish substantially all of his or professional services through the billing physician or other supplier during the following 12 months (including the month the service is performed). Comment: In response to our request for comments on how to address locum tenens relationships under Alternative 1, several commenters recommended that the locum tenens relationships should not count in calculating whether a physician shares a practice with another physician or other supplier. Another commenter suggested that abuse of locum 446

CMS-1403-FC tenens arrangements could be avoided through requirements for these arrangements in the Medicare Claims Processing Manual, 100-04, Chapter 1, §30.2.11. One commenter stated that, provided that locum tenens physicians satisfy Medicare’s requirements governing the use of and billing for such physicians, the anti-markup payment limitation should not apply to tests performed or supervised by such physicians. One commenter enumerated additional circumstances in which group practice physicians provide services to or through entities other than their primary group affiliation. These circumstances included: (1) covering for another practice while it recruits to replace a retired or deceased physician; (2) providing specialty services at hospitals or primary care clinics in areas (often rural, but not always) that would otherwise not have those specialties available and convenient to patients; and (3) providing specialty services to a different practice that has only a part-time need for the service. Another commenter noted the potential for situations where a non-radiology practice contracts with a radiologist as a locum tenens physician to circumvent the anti-markup provision. The commenter recommended that we exclude only 447

<strong>CMS</strong>-1403-FC<br />

Physician A furnishes at least 75 percent of her services<br />

through Physician Organization B, and furnishes 25 percent<br />

of her professional services through Physician C and<br />

Laboratory Supplier D. Under this example, Physician A<br />

would be considered to be sharing a practice with Physician<br />

Organization B.<br />

Revised §414.50(a)(2)(ii) provides that the<br />

“substantially all” requirement is satisfied if the billing<br />

physician or other supplier <strong>has</strong> a reasonable belief, when<br />

submitting a claim, that: (1) the performing physician <strong>has</strong><br />

furnished substantially all of his or her professional<br />

services through the billing physician or other supplier<br />

for the period of 12 months prior to and including the<br />

month in which the service was performed; or (2) the<br />

performing physician will furnish substantially all of his<br />

or professional services through the billing physician or<br />

other supplier during the following 12 months (including<br />

the month the service is performed).<br />

Comment: In response to our request for comments on<br />

how to address locum tenens relationships under Alternative<br />

1, several commenters recommended that the locum tenens<br />

relationships should not count in calculating whether a<br />

physician shares a practice with another physician or other<br />

supplier. Another commenter suggested that abuse of locum<br />

446

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!