Archive for December, 2019

Competing Surprise Billing Measures Released

Competing Surprise Billing Measures Released

Early this week, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), the Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, and Representatives Frank Pallone (D-NJ) and Greg Walden (R-OR), the Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee announced an agreement on legislation to end surprise medical bills. The two members issued a joint press statement with the hope of creating momentum to include their legislative agreement as part of any year-end omnibus appropriations bill.

The agreement is essentially a merging of the surprise billing legislation approved by both the House Energy and Commerce (H.R. 2328) and Senate HELP Committees (S.1895) earlier this year. Both bills aim to protect patients by limiting their out-of-pocket costs to amounts they would have owed if they had been treated by an in-network physician. However, both bills include provisions strongly opposed by physician and hospital groups (including the Medical Association of the State of Alabama) that would resolve payment disputes between physicians and insurers by using a benchmark rate setting out-of-network payments at the median amount each insurer pays for in-network care. The new agreement includes similar benchmark rate provisions as well as a very limited independent dispute resolution process with a $750 threshold that would only allow for the consideration of median in-network rates.

It was believed by many early in the week, that the surprise billing agreement would pass before the end of the year. However, the House Ways and Means Committee also has jurisdiction over the surprise billing issue and the committee was not included in this initial agreement. Ways and Means subsequently released its own bipartisan proposal that focuses on an arbitration process that protects the patient and said that the committee will consider the legislation in early 2020. With competing bipartisan bills now on the table, it is likely that any action on the legislation will be delayed until January.

Posted in: Uncategorized

Leave a Comment (0) →

Medical Association Convenes “Treatment Hurdles” Work Group

Medical Association Convenes “Treatment Hurdles” Work Group

Earlier this week, the Medical Association convened a work group of stakeholders to discuss hurdles and or delays that patients and their physicians face in accessing the tests, treatments and medications the treating physician believes are appropriate.

Patient advocacy groups, many of them disease-specific, joined the Association and others in discussing the hurdles patients face in accessing what their doctors have ordered or prescribed. In addition to delays or denials of care patients and their caregivers face in these situations, the administrative tasks required of physicians by insurers increase annual health spending nationwide by more than $250 billion and occupy millions of uncompensated hours of American physicians and their staff’s time.

The coalition that’s been formed to work collaboratively on these issues is gathering information from other states. If you are interested in participating in this effort, contact cflack@alamedical.org

Posted in: Advocacy, Insurance

Leave a Comment (0) →

Top 4 Dos and Don’ts For Audits and Investigations

Top 4 Dos and Don’ts For Audits and Investigations

In the spirit of college football season and the inevitable argument about which four college football teams are in the college football playoffs, this article addresses the undisputed top 4 dos and don’ts that physicians should follow during an audit or investigation.  I have represented countless medical practices and individual physicians with a variety of federal payor audits, false claims investigations and DEA investigations.  The following top 4 dos and don’ts are the top issues I see frequently repeated, oftentimes to the detriment of the provider under investigation.

# 4 – Keep an Exact Copy of Everything Produced or Viewed Most of the time I am not retained until after the practice has turned over the requested documents and, in some cases, has also turned over non-requested documents. The usual response by the practice, when asked why it did not keep a copy of what was released, is something along the lines of “we did nothing wrong” or “we know what we turned over and can make a copy if needed.”  However, when I ask for the documents produced, the practice oftentimes cannot replicate what was produced. This puts the practice at a competitive disadvantage from the start. It also makes citing to a particular document extremely difficult when legal counsel does not know (1) if a particular document was actually produced, or (2) if it was produced, where in the mountain of records the document is located. Defending the practice’s conduct or fighting a recoupment becomes challenging without a copy of the documents. Thus, the practice should go ahead and make an exact copy of what is produced and maintain the copy until the practice is reasonably sure nothing will come from the audit or investigation. It is also recommended that the practice hire legal counsel before producing records, so as to ensure that only responsive documents are produced.

# 3 – Review All of the Medical Records Before Producing.  While this seems like a no brainer, I cannot state the number of times a medical practice has printed what it believes to be the entire medical record only to learn when receiving a recoupment demand or allegation of false claims that the entire medical record was not produced.  Another common issue in this age of electronic medical records (“EMR”) is that the printed record looks substantially different than the electronic record.  Some EMR systems will print a paper copy differently if the “print” function is used versus the “print screen” function.  I have experienced numerous occasions when the paper copy looks suspicious or incomplete, particularly the patient’s history or prescription records, because of the way the EMR prints the record.  On a related note, if the practice wishes to use a consultant to conduct a simulated audit, it is important to make sure that the consultant either has access to the EMR or that the printed paper records are complete and identical to the electronic records.

# 2 – Maintain Signature Logs of Alabama Medicaid Patients.  The Alabama Medicaid Agency requires that providers maintain evidence that the patient actually attended the appointment.  It does this by requiring providers to keep a signature on file to prove the patient’s attendance at each appointment. I have represented quite a few physicians and practices in Medicaid audits, and I do not recall an audit that did not request copies of the patients’ signatures.  However, the signature requirement is not well known by Alabama providers, as many of my clients are unaware of the requirement and fail to keep a copy of the signatures. While there are other ways to prove that a patient attended the visit, it is very simple to satisfy the signature requirement and avoid having to gather other forms of proof–simply use the removable signature logs and paste the patient’s signature into the record for that particular visit.

#1 Never, Ever, Ever Voluntarily Surrender A License/Permit/Participation Without First Obtaining Advice of Counsel.  Without question, the undisputed defending champion and current #1 is never ever voluntarily surrender a license, permit or participation in a payor’s program without first obtaining advice of counsel. I have heard on multiple occasions that a particular investigator says something along the lines of the following to a licensee “Things will go much easier if you voluntarily surrender your license.”  I have never in my experience seen where things have gone easier for the physician when he/she has voluntarily surrendered his/her license. However, it does is make things easier for the licensing body, so the statement above is true as phrased. The voluntary surrender substantially compromises the physician’s ability to defend his/her case, as the physician has lost any leverage he/she may have had – the agency already has what it wants – the physician’s license.  Most licensing agencies have due process requirements that must be followed before it can revoke, suspend, or take any adverse action on a license.  One of the most important due process requirements is giving the physician the right to a hearing where the physician can be represented by counsel and present evidence. The hearing process affords the physician the ability to test the agency’s evidence and interpretation of its regulations, which are oftentimes flawed.  The hearing process also gives the physician the ability to reach a compromised resolution of the matter, oftentimes allowing the physician to keep his/her license.  By voluntarily surrendering a license, the physician loses such rights and ability.


Jim Hoover practices with Burr & Forman LLP and works exclusively within the firm’s Health Care Industry Group. Jim primarily handles healthcare litigation and compliance matters.

Posted in: Legal Watch, Members

Leave a Comment (0) →

Staff Retention Leads to a Successful Practice

Staff Retention Leads to a Successful Practice

I visit many practices throughout the year performing medical practice assessments.  One of the first items to review is staffing levels, length of service and each staff member’s role.  The administrator is a key component to engaging the staff.  Increasing the level of staff engagement can raise productivity 20% and reduce the probability of a staff member leaving by 87%.

Administrators who hire an employee for a specific position which is detailed in a job description makes the first step to communicating effectively.  Proper preparation for onboarding is essential to adding value to the employee/employer relationship.  The first day should begin with orientation, discussion of the handbook, employment paperwork and the introduction of the training plan.  More than 5% of employees leave a new job due to a disastrous first day.  It is important to equip a new employee with the tools to learn the job, such as a mentor and a checklist of key tasks they should be able to perform within a 90-day probationary period.

Once an employee is past the probationary period, goals should be set for development.  Ongoing communication and training are essential to engaging the employee and creating buy-in within the organization.

Annual evaluations are useful in rewarding good performance, and also setting goals for development.  An evaluation should not be the first time an employee learns of a performance problem.  Problems should be addressed at regular intervals with specific directions for improvement.  The evaluation should only report the need for continued improvement or acknowledgment of success.

During an office review, I sometimes find the administrator has simply turned new staff members over to the most knowledgeable employee. If the seasoned employee was not trained effectively, how successful could he or she be at preparing the new employee? The better performing practices have an effective training program, regular staff meetings and incentive programs to engage the staff.  I recently assisted a practice that had lost several key employees; they were paralyzed.  They could not even generate financial reports to realize the extent of their problems.  Your staff is your most valuable asset and losing them can be costly. It can cost 150% to replace a valuable employee considering loss of production and training time.

Cross-training staff to perform multiple task is a good way to assure you can get through a short-term absence or the timeline to replace an employee. Documented best practice workflows should be obtained from your practice management vendor and EHR vendor to ensure you can train appropriately. We are assisting practices in changing their employee bonus structure to reward performance and buy-in. Take care of your best asset, the staff you have trained and who know your practice. Warren Averett can assist you with all your recruiting and staff management projects.

MBI Transition Ends This Month: WILL YOU BE PAID ON JANUARY 1?

The 21 month transition period will end on December 31; use Medicare Beneficiary identifiers (MBIs) now.

  • You are currently submitting 86% of claims with MBIs.
  • Get MBIs from your patients and through the MAC portals (sign up) now and after the transition period. You can also find the MBI on the remittance advice.
  • Protect your patients from identity theft – use MBIs.

Starting January 1, if you do not use the MBI (regardless of the date of service) for Medicare transactions:

  • We will reject your claims with a few exceptions
  • We will reject all eligibility transactions

See the MLN Matters Article for more information on getting and using MBIs.


Article contributed by Tammie Lunceford, Healthcare and Dental Consultant, Warren Averett Healthcare Consulting Group. Warren Averett is an official Gold Partner with the Medical Association.

Posted in: Management, Members

Leave a Comment (0) →

Alabama medical experts ask for $478,000 to investigate pregnancy-related deaths

Alabama medical experts ask for $478,000 to investigate pregnancy-related deaths

 AL.com – Anna Claire Vollers

In the wake of increased attention to a rising maternal death rate, a growing chorus is calling on Alabama to investigate the deaths of mothers from pregnancy and childbirth complications.

“Each and every maternal death is devastating to families, and leaves everyone asking ‘why?’” said Dr. John Meigs, president of the Medical Association of the State of Alabama, in a statement. “As physicians, we feel like our state has got to do better, can do better and must do better, and our coalition partners feel the same way.”

In recent weeks, the Alabama Department of Public Health asked Gov. Kay Ivey for $478,000 to better investigate why Alabama mothers are dying from pregnancy and childbirth complications.

If the request makes it into the governor’s state budget recommendation, then the Medical Association, the nonprofit March of Dimes and consumer giant Johnson & Johnson are gearing up to push for the funding in the upcoming legislative session.

In states like Texas and Tennessee, efforts to investigate maternal deaths have found most of the deaths could have been prevented. Investigations in states like California and North Carolina led to changes in healthcare and services provided to mothers.

Alabama doesn’t really know why mothers are dying from childbirth and pregnancy complications. Or even how many.

“But until we have a thorough review of the maternal death data, we can’t answer the all-important question of ‘why?’ and take steps to stop maternal deaths,” said Meigs.

Officially, 41 mothers died from pregnancy or childbirth complications in 2017, according to death certificate data reported by the state. It’s the highest number of deaths related to childbirth and pregnancy that Alabama has recorded in recent years.

But using just the death certificate data has been shown to be unreliable. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention doesn’t recommend using those numbers alone to get an accurate count of maternal deaths.

Instead, the gold standard for investigating deaths of mothers from pregnancy and childbirth is a statewide task force called a Maternal Mortality Review Committee, which reviews medical records and other documents related to every death of a mother, related to childbirth or pregnancy.

All of Alabama’s neighboring states have one already.

If the $478,000 is approved by the state legislature next year, it would fund Alabama’s new MMRC. Late last year, a coalition of Alabama doctors, nurses, public health leaders and other formed the state’s first MMRC under the umbrella of the Alabama Department of Public Health.

Right now, the MMRC operates on a shoestring budget, limiting the number of cases it can review. It’s mostly staffed with volunteers.

A group of Alabama OBYNs and the Medical Association worked with ADPH to come up with the $478,000 figure, said Trace Zarr, director of political development at the Medical Association.

The bulk of the money, about $300,000, would go toward hiring paid staff to compile and organize the case files of Alabama women who died from pregnancy or childbirth-related issues.

Another $108,000 would go toward autopsy reviews, and the rest would pay for support staff, equipment and supplies.

“We want to make sure we get not only a good count of the number of deaths, but qualitative data on the broader factors associated with these deaths,” said Britta Cedergren, director of maternal-child health and government affairs with the March of Dimes, which has partnered with the medical association and the state health department to lobby for funding.

“We want to determine whether these deaths were preventable. If it was a postpartum depression-related suicide, what could have been done differently? Or was there an undiagnosed issue related to pregnancy, like hypertension?”

If the MMRC is fully-funded, it could have a lasting impact on the health of mothers in the state.

Tennessee, which launched its MMRC program two years ago, found a whopping 85 percent of its maternal deaths were preventable.

California, one of the first to launch a review committee back in 2006, has since cut its rate of women dying in childbirth by 55 percent. That’s due in large part to is committee identifying two complications that were killing mothers but were largely preventable: hemorrhage and pregnancy-induced high blood pressure.

And Alabama already has a similar program that investigates infant deaths. Meigs credits the state-funded infant mortality review for reducing Alabama’s infant mortality rate in recent years. In 2017 Alabama’s infant mortality rate, still high by national standards, hit a state-record low.

“But Alabama currently doesn’t fund maternal mortality review, and until we appropriately do so and dig down into the root causes of maternal death in this state,” he said, “we can’t expect to be able to make informed health policy decisions as a state, to move forward in eradicating maternal deaths.”

The Medical Association, a private professional organization that lobbies state lawmakers on behalf of doctors, has recently launched a new initiative, the Save Alabama Moms campaign. On its website, alabamamedicine.org/savealmoms, is the tagline: “It’s time to solve the maternal mortality crisis.”

Read more on motherhood in Alabama at al.com/motherhood. Join the conversation around issues that matter to women in the South on the Reckon Women group on Facebook. And for the best stories delivered straight to your inbox, sign up for our Reckon Women newsletter.

Click the image above to learn more about Alabama’s maternal mortality crisis.

Click the image to view the document outlining our request to fund the MMRC.

Click the image to check out our Twitter page and share a post with #savealmoms

Posted in: Advocacy

Leave a Comment (0) →