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 identified as having higher TC MP RVUs than PC MP RVUs. The commenters stated that any premium data received would represent general liability insurance, not liability insurance premium data related to nonphysician clinical personnel. The commenters suggested that premium data does not exist to support a resource-based computation of the MP RVUs for the TC and stated that general liability insurance premiums are included in the PE component and should not be part of the MP RVU calculation. Response: We appreciate the comments in support of our proposal to instruct our contractor to research available data sources for the MP costs associated with the TC portions of these codes. As we stated in the CY 2008 PFS final rule with comment period (72 FR 66248), we are not able to evaluate whether sufficient data exists or to make a judgment on the RUC’s assertion that such data are not available. It is possible that the contractor responsible for collecting the data for the 5-year MP RVU update will identify providers of professional liability insurance for nonphysician clinical personnel. We plan to share the information received on a potential source of such data with our contractor. If such premium data can be identified, it will be incorporated into the MP RVU update. In the event that we adopt such data, we will ensure there 90

CMS-1403-FC is no duplication of costs between the PE and the MP RVUs. As noted in the CY 2009 PFS proposed rule, and discussed above in this section, we will be addressing this issue as part of the update to the malpractice RVUs for CY 2010. 91

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

identified as having higher TC MP RVUs than PC MP RVUs.<br />

The commenters stated that any premium data received would<br />

represent general liability insurance, not liability<br />

insurance premium data related to nonphysician clinical<br />

personnel. The commenters suggested that premium data does<br />

not exist to support a resource-based computation of the MP<br />

RVUs for the TC and stated that general liability insurance<br />

premiums are included in the PE component and should not be<br />

part of the MP RVU calculation.<br />

Response: We appreciate the comments in support of<br />

our proposal to instruct our contractor to research<br />

available data sources for the MP costs associated with the<br />

TC portions of these codes. As we stated in the CY 2008<br />

PFS final rule with comment period (72 FR 66248), we are<br />

not able to evaluate whether sufficient data exists or to<br />

make a judgment on the RUC’s assertion that such data are<br />

not available. It is possible that the contractor<br />

responsible for collecting the data for the 5-year MP RVU<br />

update will identify providers of professional liability<br />

insurance for nonphysician clinical personnel. We plan to<br />

share the information received on a potential source of<br />

such data with our contractor. If such premium data can be<br />

identified, it will be incorporated into the MP RVU update.<br />

In the event that we adopt such data, we will ensure there<br />

90

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!