19.02.2013 Views

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 ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

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

proposed). However, we are not incorporating each element<br />

of the same building “location” test from the in-office<br />

ancillary services exception as set forth in<br />

§411.355(b)(2). A TC that is performed (that is, both<br />

conducted by the technician and supervised by the<br />

physician) in the “office of the billing physician or other<br />

supplier” will not be subject to the anti-markup payment<br />

limitation. Likewise, a PC that is performed in the<br />

“office of the billing physician or other supplier” will<br />

not be subject to the anti-markup payment limitation.<br />

Diagnostic testing services are performed or interpreted in<br />

the “office of the billing physician or other supplier” if<br />

they are performed or interpreted in the “same building”<br />

(as defined in §411.351) as the space in which the ordering<br />

physician or other ordering supplier regularly furnishes<br />

patient care. In the CY 2008 PFS, we stated that various<br />

stakeholders informed us that a physician organization,<br />

such as a multi-specialty group, may not provide<br />

substantially its full range of services for a certain<br />

specialty at any one location, but rather may provide<br />

substantially the full range of services for a certain<br />

specialty in one location, substantially the full range of<br />

services for a second specialty in a second location, and<br />

so forth. In order to address this situation, we proposed<br />

468

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!