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 medical records management for services performed within their practices as those practices that utilize an outside supplier for the TCs or PCs of their tests. Response: We are unclear as to what the commenter is suggesting. We did not propose to, and this final rule does not, impose tighter billing restrictions on TCs and PCs ordered by dermatologic surgeons than for other specialties, and does not impose tighter billing restrictions for dermatologic surgeons who perform TCs and PCs than it does for those physician practices that purchase TCs and PCs from an outside supplier. We note that the commenter did not provide an explanation of why patient access to care in rural or underserved areas would be affected by our proposed revisions. Comment: A letter writing campaign expressed concern regarding the proposals to the anti-markup provisions, contending that it would limit the ability of allergists to provide services on a part-time basis with more than one group and, in particular, would limit access to allergy care (including allergy diagnostic tests), to Medicare beneficiaries in rural or underserved areas. The commenters urged that our proposals not be implemented. Response: We have adopted the first proposed alternative with modification, whereby the anti-markup 518

CMS-1403-FC provisions will not apply to TCs and PCs supervised or performed by a physician who performs “substantially all” (at least 75 percent) of his or her professional services for the billing physician or other supplier, which provides some flexibility for the performing physician to work for more than one billing physician or other supplier. Moreover, this final rule provides additional flexibility by allowing arrangements that do not come within the protection of the “substantially all” test to avoid the application of the anti-markup payment limitation by complying on a case-by-case basis with the existing site- of-service approach (as clarified by this final rule with comment period). We believe that this addresses the commenters’ concerns. 519

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

medical records management for services performed within<br />

their practices as those practices that utilize an outside<br />

supplier for the TCs or PCs of their tests.<br />

Response: We are unclear as to what the commenter is<br />

suggesting. We did not propose to, and this final rule<br />

does not, impose tighter billing restrictions on TCs and<br />

PCs ordered by dermatologic surgeons than for other<br />

specialties, and does not impose tighter billing<br />

restrictions for dermatologic surgeons who perform TCs and<br />

PCs than it does for those physician practices that<br />

purc<strong>has</strong>e TCs and PCs from an outside supplier. We note<br />

that the commenter did not provide an explanation of why<br />

patient access to care in rural or underserved areas would<br />

be affected by our proposed revisions.<br />

Comment: A letter writing campaign expressed concern<br />

regarding the proposals to the anti-markup provisions,<br />

contending that it would limit the ability of allergists to<br />

provide services on a part-time basis with more than one<br />

group and, in particular, would limit access to allergy<br />

care (including allergy diagnostic tests), to Medicare<br />

beneficiaries in rural or underserved areas. The<br />

commenters urged that our proposals not be implemented.<br />

Response: We have adopted the first proposed<br />

alternative with modification, whereby the anti-markup<br />

518

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!