June 30 is the Deadline for Avoiding 2013 ePrescribing Penalty.

If you are a Medicare provider, you may soon be facing eRx penalties if you don’t take action. CMS mandates that you send and report 10 G-codes by June 30th in order to avoid a 1.5% Medicare deduction in 2013. Make sure you are eprescribing regularly and reporting the correct G-codes—or check to see if you qualify for an exception:

Remember, our eprescribing and customer service are completely free, so let us know if you need any help getting started with eRx.

How do I sign up to ePrescribe? Where do I go to sign up to ePrescribe? What forms do I need complete?

To sign up for ePrescribing, please complete the form at Sign up for eRx. Once you’ve completed this, you’ll want to scan it along with your valid medical license and un-expired driver’s license.

You will then upload the scanned ePrescribing form along with the above licenses to the Contact Support page, linked below. For the Case Issue select the option ePrescribing. You will then see an*Upload option with a button to Choose File; click this button to select the scanned ePrescribing form.

Complete the rest of the form, including name, email and practice ID. Click the Send button to submit it to Practice Fusion. It generally takes 3-5 days once you submit the form to enabled for ePrescribing to be enabled on your account.

*Please note: only users with valid NPI or DEA numbers and medical license can be enabled; office staff user accounts cannot be activated for ePrescribing.

WellPoint’s New Hire…Watson. What is it?

Watson consists of 90 IBM Power 750 Express servers powered by 8-core processors — four in each machine — for a total of 32 processors per machine. The servers are virtualized with a kernel-based virtual machine scheme, resulting in a server cluster with a total processing capacity of 80 teraflops. (A teraflop is one trillion operations per second.)

That horsepower can help medical professionals cull through a lot of information quickly. Watson can search 200 million pages of data and provide responses in just seconds.

WellPoint Inc, a US health insurer have agreed to use IBM‘s Watson technology to help physicians identify best treatment options. The new collaboration will be introduced some time in next couple of years and will initially be used by nurses who review treatment requests from doctors and others and manage involved patient cases.

“Imagine having the ability within three seconds to look through all of that information, to have it be up to date, scientifically presented to you, and based on that patients’ medical needs at the moment you’re caring for that patient,” WellPoint’s chief medical officer, Dr. Sam Nussbaum, told the Associated Press.

The WellPoint application will combine data from three sources:

  • A patient’s chart and electronic records that a doctor or hospital.
  • An insurance company’s history of medicines and treatments.
  • Watson’s huge library of textbooks and medical journals.

WellPoint Inc., which has 34.2 million members, would integrate Watson’s promised “lightning” speed and deep health care database into an existing patient information, helping users best select among treatment options and medicines.

“This very much fits into the sweet spot of what we envisioned for the applications of Watson,” Manoj Saxena, general manager of an IBM division looking at how the computer can be marketed, told reporters.

WellPoint said it plans to use Watson’s data-crunching to help suggest treatment options and diagnoses to doctors, which is part of a general trend for incorporating computer-influenced supervision into care.

Insurers say the procedure would ensure that doctors and hospitals who adopt electronic medical records and other digital tools will be capable of recording, tracking and checking their work.

The company added that they hope the technology will help improve the quality of patient care and help reduce costs.

WellPoint is the nation’s largest publicly traded health insurer based on enrollment. It operates Blue Cross Blue Shield plans in 14 states, including New York and California.

The Watson technology is capable of processing about 200 million pages of content in less than three seconds, according to IBM.

Excerpts of the data sources behind the particular suggestions that the Watson technology will be offering will be displayed by the WellPoint system.

What is the average percentage of leakage in hospital setting?

There’s a pervasive myth in the world of healthcare revenue assurance that a standard benchmark exists for revenue leakage. In fact, the question asked most often at conferences and meetings is, “What is the average percentage of leakage in hospital setting?”

The people asking that question are generally interested in determining a benchmark against which to measure an individual hospital, identifying potential revenue capture opportunities, or simply determining the level of focus and investment to devote to revenue assurance in their hospital.

However, after conducting numerous revenue assurance reviews, one sees that this question is a distorted way to look at the revenue assurance challenge. In fact, the question itself presumes there is “average” leakage, which is generally not the case. More often, there are specific trigger events that can cause leakage to spike and, if not rapidly detected, will cause losses far above any likely “average” until they are corrected. Some other crucial points are:

• Actual leakage events for certain hospitals, based on analysis of available data, reflect peaks and valleys of leakage rather than a steady flow.

• Expected leakage varies dramatically and is based on variables such as speciality of hospital, HIS, documentation, Coding, Coding Audits, Billing Service, internal and/ or outsourced processes etc.

• Findings of low leakage can create a false sense of security and may result in potential under-investment in preventive controls.

• It may not be practical to have an accurate measure of leakage at any given point in time, but once detected most leakage is correctable. The challenge lies in its initial detection and identification.

Hospitals that do achieve a constant and controlled level of leakage consistently are those that have the best level of end-to-end balancing controls.

 

100 charged in health care fraud bust By Terry Frieden, CNN

updated 3:48 PM EDT, Wed May 2, 2012

Washington (CNN) — More than 100 people have been charged and an estimated $450 million in false billings uncovered by federal agents in a nationwide operation that authorities say is the largest bust in recent history. Law enforcement sources say the charges were lodged in seven metropolitan areas, capping an investigation of several months into efforts to defraud Medicare, Medicaid and other federal health programs.
It is the largest of four such sweeps announced during the Obama administration. Attorney General Eric Holder and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius are expected to announce the operation Wednesday and emphasize their determination to combat phony billing practices in the health care industry.

More than ever you need to have a expert billers with experience to manage all billing intricacies.

Please call us today if you need to know more about our services. We work hard to ensure that your practice receives the full reimbursement to which it is entitled. That’s our job, and we give it our all, every day!

Because, in the end, if you don’t get paid, we don’t get paid.

3M Health acquired veteran coding firm CodeRyte

3M acquired CodeRyte

Bethesda, Md.-based CodeRyte sells Computer Assisted Coding (CAC) software and natural language processing (NLP) software that reads physician documentation and assigns appropriate codes for review by a coder. The company, with about 250 clients, also offers outsourced coding services. Computer-assisted coding (CAC) automatically generates medical codes directly from clinical documentation. With CAC technology, healthcare organizations can streamline their revenue-cycle processes while becoming more compliant with the increasingly complex payer and quality reporting requirements.

CodeRyte’s software enables identification and extraction for analysis of clinical information from free-text and structured medical records. The software supports the analysis of demographic and referral patterns, revenue optimization, payer mix, RAC preparation, clinical appropriateness, regulations, quality initiatives and clinical trials, according to the vendor. Electronic health records (EHR) produce a rich source of electronic documentation; however, these systems can be difficult to integrate into the coding process. CAC technology provides a bridge between the documentation in EHR and transcription systems and healthcare financial systems. CAC natural-language processing (NLP) applications scrutinize and interpret unstructured clinicians’ notes using specialized linguistic algorithms, extracting the clinical facts that support the assignment of codes. Structured input applications integrate the coding into the clinical documentation process, producing clinical documents with embedded codes.

NLP applications typically can work with current clinical-documentation practices that produce unstructured text, such as dictation, speech recognition and transcription. CAC is frequently deployed using the software-as-a-service (SaaS) model but also can be handled as a conventional client-server software installation. With SaaS deployment, local installation requirements are minimal. CAC products often include a number of different modules to provide a complete coding work-flow solution, including coding review, production monitoring, management reporting, coding automation and auditing. Data interfaces are required to feed the clinical documentation into the CAC application and accept the coded data into the organization’s billing system. Standard interface formats such as HL7 or XML can be used to export the clinical documents. With NLP-based systems, however, virtually any document format can be used. Web services are also an option for some environments, particularly if an existing programming interface is available. The output of the CAC work flow is coded records, including the CPT and ICD-9 coding and other information needed to file a complete claim, such as modifiers, units, code linkage, patient demographics and payer demographics. For optimum work flow that does not require data entry, the coded data transfers directly from the CAC system into the billing system. CAC does not eliminate the need for medical-coding professionals to be involved in the coding process. It can make them more productive and accurate. To review the codes, coders use an application that displays the clinical documentation side-by-side with the medical codes. Coders can review and modify the coding in the application, and validate it against local and national coverage guidelines in real time. Coding managers and administrators typically require separate training for the reporting and production-monitoring modules. Today, CAC is most widely used in physician coding for outpatient services. Some of the medical specialties that currently use CAC include radiology, emergency medicine, pathology and cardiology. Hospital coding applications have also gained momentum during recent years.

CAC offers five benefits to those organizations that perform coding and billing functions:

Productivity: Productivity increases when the average amount of time to code a case decreases. An increase in productivity results due to the elimination or speeding up of particular manual tasks within the coding process, such as document sorting, storage and retrieval, duplicate identification, code lookup and selection, code ordering, or data entry.

Accuracy: Accuracy improves when the coding output better matches both official guidelines and payer reporting requirements. An improvement in accuracy can be observed through a decrease in denials, reduction in audit discrepancies, or finding lost charges that were previously under-coded. Increasing accuracy helps assure that an organization captures all of the charges that it is entitled to collect.

Consistency: Consistency in the coding process ensures that guidelines are applied similarly over time and across multiple coding resources. A high level of consistency instills confidence in the coding results, supporting accurate clinical and financial analysis. This is particularly important when employing coders with differing levels of skills and experience.

Transparency: Transparency and traceability enhance the manageability of the coding process by providing evidence of both the work flow and thought processes that went into the coding results. This may include links between the codes assigned and the portions of the patient records that support the codes, or an audit trail of all changes made to the coding or demographics.

Compliance: Compliance supports a proactive and auditable coding process, which strives to “get it right the first time” and reduce additional work time and rebilling. Improvements in compliance are a result of more-accurate and consistent coding, as well as transparency in the coding process. Together, these benefits reduce the preparation work for audits, while simultaneously improving audit outcomes.

Accountable Care Organizations, Explained

Accountable Care OrganizationAccountable care organizations take up only seven pages of the massive new health law yet have become one of the most talked about provisions.

This latest model for delivering services offers doctors and hospitals financial incentives to provide good quality care to Medicare beneficiaries while keeping down costs. A cottage industry of consultants has sprung up to help even ordinary hospitals become the first ACOs on the block.

Yet the concept has been short on details. ACOs have been compared to the elusive unicorn: everyone seems to know what it looks like, but no one has actually seen one. But the health care industry has already embarked on a frenzied quest to create them as quickly as possible. Today, after many delays and false starts, the Obama administration proposed guidelines on how ACOs will work.

Here is a brief guide to what we know about ACOs.

What is an accountable care organization?

An ACO is a network of doctors and hospitals that shares responsibility for providing care to patients. In the new law, an ACO would agree to manage all of the health care needs of a minimum of 5,000 Medicare beneficiaries for at least three years.

Think of it as buying a television, says Harold Miller, president and CEO of the Network for Regional Healthcare Improvement and executive director of the Center for Healthcare Quality & Payment Reform in Pittsburgh. A TV manufacturer like Sony may contract with many suppliers to build sets. Like Sony does for TVs, Miller says, an ACO would bring together the different component parts of care for the patient – primary care, specialists, hospitals, home health care, etc. – and ensure that all of the “parts work well together.”

The problem today, Miller says, is that patients are getting each part of their health care separately. “People want to buy individual circuit boards, not a whole TV,” he says. “If we can show them that the TV works better, maybe they’ll buy it,” rather than assembling a patchwork of services themselves. “But ACOs will need to prove that the overall health care product they’re creating does work better and costs less in order to encourage patients and payers to buy it.”

When will ACOs begin operating?

The ACO initiative is scheduled to launch in January 2012, but the race to form ACOs has already begun. Hospitals, physician practices and insurers across the country, from New Hampshire to Arizona, are announcing their plans to form ACOs, not only for Medicare beneficiaries but for patients with private insurance as well. Some groups have already created what they call ACOs.

Why did Congress include ACOs in the law?

As lawmakers search for ways to reduce the national deficit, Medicare is a prime target. With baby boomers entering retirement age, the costs of the program for elderly and disabled Americans are expected to soar.

ACOs would make providers jointly accountable for the health of their patients, giving them strong incentives to cooperate and save money by avoiding unnecessary tests and procedures. For ACOs to work they’d have to seamlessly share information. Those that save money while also meeting quality targets would keep a portion of the savings. But some providers could also be at risk of losing money.

HHS estimates that ACOs could save Medicare up to $960 million in the first three years. That’s far less than one percent of Medicare spending during that period. If the program is successful, it can be expanded by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

How would ACOs be paid?

In Medicare’s traditional fee-for-service payment system, doctors and hospitals generally are paid more when they give patients more tests and do more procedures. That drives up costs, experts say. ACOs wouldn’t do away with fee for service but would create savings incentives by offering bonuses when providers keep costs down and meet specific quality benchmarks, focusing on prevention and carefully managing patients with chronic diseases. In other words, providers would get paid more for keeping their patients healthy and out of the hospital.

If an ACO is not able to save money, it would be stuck with the costs of investments made to improve care, such as adding new nurse care managers, but would still get to keep the standard Medicare fees. The law also gives regulators the ability to devise other payment methods, which would likely ask ACOs to bear more risk. For example, an ACO could be paid a flat fee for each patient it cares for.

How would an ACO be different for patients?

Primary care doctors who are part of an ACO would be required to tell their patients. But although physicians will likely want to refer patients to hospitals and specialists within the ACO network, patients would still be free to see doctors of their choice outside the network without paying more. ACOs also will be under pressure to provide high quality care because if they don’t meet standards, they won’t get to share in any savings – and could lose their contracts.

Who’s in charge — hospitals, doctors or insurers?

Hospitals, doctors and insurers are all vying to run ACOs. Kelly Devers, a senior fellow at the nonprofit Urban Institute, explains that the question was left purposely vague in order to be flexible. “We know there are a range of provider organizations” that could manage an ACO, “but we don’t know which one is superior.”

Some regions of the country, including parts of California, already have large multispecialty physician groups that may become an ACO on their own, likely by networking with neighboring hospitals. “A lot of health care organizations are going to dust off the existing structures they had in place” in the past, Devers says.

In other regions, large hospital systems are scrambling to buy up physician practices with the goal of becoming ACOs that directly employ the majority of their providers. Because hospitals usually have access to capital, they may have an easier time than doctors in financing the initial investment required by an ACO.

Some of the largest health insurers in the country, including Humana, United Healthcare and Cigna, already have announced plans to form their own ACOs. Insurers say they can play an important role in ACOs because they track and collect data on patients, which is critical for coordinating care and reporting on the results.

If I don’t like HMOs, why should I consider an ACO?

ACOs may sound a lot like health maintenance organizations. “Some people say ACOs are HMOs in drag,” says Devers. But there are some critical differences – notably, an ACO patient is not required to stay in the network.

Steve Lieberman, a visiting scholar at the Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform at the Brookings Institution and the president of Lieberman Consulting Inc., explains that ACOs aim to replicate “the performance of an HMO” in holding down the cost of care while avoiding “the structural features that give the HMO control over [patient] referral patterns,” which limited patient options and created a consumer backlash in the 1990s.

What can go wrong?

Lieberman cautions that ACOs are not a panacea. “ACO has become the three-letter health acronym of the year, if not the decade,” he says. The health industry tends to operate with “kind of a herd behavior,” rushing to implement an idea “without working through the detailed business questions of how they’ll work.”

Many health care economists fear that the race to form ACOs could have a significant downside: hospital mergers and provider consolidation. As hospitals position themselves to become integrated systems, many are joining forces and purchasing physician practices, leaving fewer independent hospitals and doctors. Greater market share gives these health systems more leverage in negotiations with insurers, which can drive up health costs.

But Lieberman says while ACOs could accelerate consolidations, it’s already “such a powerful and pervasive trend that it’s a little like worrying about the calories I get when I eat the maraschino cherry on top of my hot fudge sundae. It’s a serious public policy issue with or without ACOs.”

Are there any possible legal concerns?

Doctors, hospitals and others in the health care industry have raised concerns that ACOs could run afoul of antitrust and anti-fraud laws, which try to limit market power that drives up prices and stifles competition. One concern is that ACOs, particularly those in rural markets, could grow so large that they would employ the majority of providers in a region.

To help providers avoid legal problems, the U.S. Justice Department’s antitrust division promises to provide an expedited antitrust review process for these new doctor-hospital partnership.

This story was produced through collaboration between NPR and Kaiser Health News (KHN), an editorially independent news service and a program of the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonpartisan health care policy organization that isn’t affiliated with Kaiser Permanente.

Difference Between Medical Billing Software and Electronic Medical Record (EMR)

Electronic Medical Record

Practice Fusion - EMR

Medical billing and EMR software systems are often designed to have overlapping features that improve the functionality and usability of the systems in order to make them a “one-stop-solution” for a practice’s medical IT needs. As a result, medical billing software and EMRs end up being interchangeably used discounting the primary objectives of each of the systems.

Many EMR companies are going the whole way to provide doctors with a single, comprehensive solution that will help them achieve Meaningful Use by incorporating crucial features like clinical notes, patient information and history, medication/prescription/drug allergies, diagnosis/treatments/procedures, patient scheduling, appointment reminders, e-prescribing, electronically available results, scans and reports, patient education resources, clinical decision support as well as full-fledged medical billing programs.

Specialized medical billing software on the other hand, is particularly programmed to maintain and keep detailed records of tests, procedures, examinations, diagnoses and treatments conducted on patients. It combines this medical information with the patient’s policy details to formulate a complete medical record that is used to generate bills.

The software electronically submits these bills to the patient as well as the health insurance company for payment. Before a bill can be submitted to the policy provider, it has to be coded based on Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9/ICD-10) protocols. Medical billing software systems are programmed to automatically assign these codes based on the patient’s medical record. After reviewing the bill, the insurance company sends the appropriate payment (or notice of denial) notifying the patient and practitioner via an Explanation of Benefits (EOB) letter which is added to the patient’s medical billing record by the software. In case of a dispute, rectification of bills with errors or missing information and follow up on claims, the software will update the patient’s medical record and billing details with the revised information.
Medical billing and coding software is thus equipped to seamlessly and accurately handle all complex processes and correspondence involved in medical billing.
A typical base package of medical billing software would contain features that are restricted to medical billing and accounting functions like patient recordkeeping, claims processing, electronic claims submission, receivables management, patient billing and accounting integration. However, many software providers extend their scope to include features like practice management, scheduling and other administrative and clinical functions that are generally a part of EMR software systems.
Therefore, the difference between medical billing software and an EMR is that of core functionality. While medical billing software focuses on a practice’s medical billing procedures and billing-related administrative and financial processesfeatures of an EMR are primarily concentrated on clinical functions, records and outcomes.
Medical billing software may serve clinical EMR functions in addition to electronic billing and coding for greater versatility. The same is true for EMR systems that incorporate specialized medical billing and coding program features to supplement their clinical applications.

What is HIPAA 5010 Rule?

What is HIPAA 5010 Rule?

HIPAA X12 standards, version 5010, is a new standard that regulates the electronic transmission of specific health care transactions. Covered entities, such as health
plans, health care clearinghouses, and health care providers, are required to conform to HIPAA 5010 standards. The compliance date for use of these standards is January 1, 2012. It is necessary to implement the new standard to prepare for the transition to ICD-10-CM and ICD-10-PCS. The compliance date for ICD-10 is  October 1, 2013.

As a provider should I care?

HIPAA 5010 can be understood as an upgrade on the existing form of HIPAA rather than a significant change in the way HIPAA-defined benchmarks have been defined for processing transactions in the healthcare industry. The changes put forth as a part of HIPAA 5010 were being anticipated for some time since the existing standards of HIPAA were beginning to seem a bit outdated. HIPAA 5010 has been created in such manner that the forthcoming changes in the revised medical billing/coding data of ICD-10-CM & ICD-10-PCS will be accommodated by all covered entities in a better manner. These changes in the coding systems are scheduled to be made effective from October 1, 2013 and thus, adoption of HIPAA 5010 will mean that all covered entities and their business associates have sufficient time and proper understanding of the altered coding systems. However, this doesn’t mean that HIPAA 5010 doesn’t present any challenges to the US healthcare industry.

Whats the difference between old HIPAA 4010A1 and new HIPAA 5010?

For starters, the there are some major differences between HIPAA 5010 Rule and the existing, HIPAA 4010A1 standards. As a result, the entire process of upgrading to HIPAA 5010 could be a bit time consuming. However, this slight deterrent is largely negated by the fact that the adoption of HIPAA 5010 will improve the quality of transactions in many ways. The most notable advantages would be the removal of ambiguities in the existing healthcare information processing systems, ensuring more consistency in healthcare transactions. This will also help to graduate towards adopting NPI regulations in a more comprehensive manner and easier elimination of patient data that has no relevance. Covered entities or business entities in the US healthcare industry shouldn’t feel threatened by the introduction of HIPAA 5010 since it doesn’t put forth a financial stress on their operations. These entities merely need to review their existing systems and that of their business partners and understand how HIPAA 5010-defined standards can be adopted, i.e. ensuring HIPAA 5010 compliance in the most undemanding manner is possible.

Survey: Doctor Groups Ready To Purchase EHR Systems in Near Future

Half of more than 1,300 surveyed physician practices anticipate purchasing an electronic health record system during the next two years, according to a report by the advisory and research firm CapSite, Health Data Management reports.

Of the remaining practices, 70% say they already have an EHR system that is capable of supporting meaningful use criteria under the federal health reform law, according to the survey.

The survey of both independent and hospital-owned practices also found that:

  • Ambulatory IT purchasing would nearly double 2010 levels (Goedert, Health Data Management, 6/21);
  • Ambulatory practice management and EHR systems will make up a $3 billion market through 2013 (Ritchie, “CincyBiz Blog,” Greater Cincinnati Business Courier, 6/22); and
  • 63% of respondents will replace their current management system with an integrated practice management/EHR system.

Data Analysis To Health Care’s Rescue

IT helps health-care group identify best clinical practices

By Rick Whiting

Intermountain Health Care is saving lives, improving patient care, and cutting costs by analyzing the clinical and financial information in its 1.2-terabyte data warehouse. By identifying best clinical practices among its physicians, the IT system is helping to save the lives of as many as 1,200 cardiovascular patients each year.

The Salt Lake City health-care company provides health insurance and medical services to about 500,000 Utah and Idaho residents through its 22 hospitals and 80 outpatient clinics. Its data warehouse, which has been operational for three years, contains 25 years of medical records, including hospital acute-care and outpatient clinic information and financial and claims data detailing the cost of those services.

Like many businesses with data warehouses, the community-owned non-profit health-care provider has been using its data warehouse for several years to help manage costs. Connected to the data warehouse is a materials-management data mart with information about the provider’s purchases of medical supplies and other goods. The system helps Intermountain better manage purchasing contracts and obtain volume discounts, says Dale Sanders, enterprise data warehousing director.

The company is using its data warehouse to take customer service to a level most businesses never dream of. The system is used to analyze the specific health-care services, treatments, and medications that are provided to patients to help Intermountain understand which ones are the most effective. The research is carried out by cross-functional teams made up of doctors, nurses, a data-warehouse technician, data analysts, and statisticians. “The big vision is to integrate clinical, claims, and financial data so we can understand clinical outcomes and the cost. That way we can improve the former and reduce the latter,” Sanders says.

One two-year study of the company’s services provided to diabetics concluded that treatments are more effective when accompanied by frequent cholesterol tests and regular eye exams, Sanders says. Similar studies are ongoing for cancer health-care services and services for mothers and newborns.

How successful has the effort been? Intermountain has used the data warehouse to analyze treatments provided to its cardiovascular patients for five years (including the two years the system was in its prototype stage). That analysis resulted in improvements to follow-up services provided after the patients were discharged from the hospital. A recent mortality study conducted by the company concluded that those and other changes spurred by the data analysis have saved 1,200 lives each year, Sanders says.

Intermountain uses a variety of analytical tools running with the data warehouse, including custom applications and Microsoft Access and Excel. It used Business Objects SA’s query and reporting tool for about a year but is switching to reporting software from Crystal Decisions. Business Objects was more expensive, partly because of training costs, Sanders says. The company will save $650,000 a year in development costs with Crystal Decisions, as well as $1.1 million in license, training, and administration costs in the next three years.