Posts Tagged: case management protocol

Connolly Adds 20 More in April

More High Dollar, High Volume DRGs

Connolly Healthcare, the RAC for Region C, posted 20 new DRG Validation Issues to their list of CMS-Approved audit issues, on Friday, April16. The list includes eight (8) MS-DRGs with very high Relative Weights (which equates to high dollar reimbursements and thereby potentially high RAC fees) and six (6) with claim volumes in the top 25% of all DRGs (providing a rather large number of claims to potentially audit).

Four (4) of the newly approved issues are for MSDRGs with Relative Weights of better than 10.0.  Such claims have high dollar reimbursements, averaging over $45,000 per claim, nationwide.

Once again, these approval/postings seems to continue a pattern previously noted. (See our posts from February 9 and March 17.)

Virgina and West Virginia Now Included

The states of Virginia and West Virginia have been absent from the list of states affected or approved for any issues, until some recent changes to the lists, earlier in April. Still, not all the issues have been approved for these two states.

The New Issues

Below are the new posted and approved audit issues for RAC Region C, including Relative Weights and FY09 Discharge Ranks:  (a low rank number relates to a large number of discharges for that DRG, nationwide)

  • MS-DRG 003: ECMO or Tracheotomy with Mechanical Ventilation 96+ Hours or Principal Diagnosis Except Face, Mouth and Neck with Major O.R. (RW 18.27; Rank 122)
  • MS-DRG 001: Heart Transplant or Implant of Heart Assist System with MCC (RW 24.85; Rank 720)
  • MS-DRG 005: Liver Transplant with MCC or Intestinal Transplant (RW 10.14; Rank 713)
  • MS-DRG 332: Rectal Resection with MCC (RW 4.78; Rank 297)
  • MS-DRG 562: Kidney Transplant (RW 1.38; Rank 79)
  • MS-DRG 011: Tracheotomy for Face, Mouth, and Neck Diagnoses with MCC (RW 4.73; Rank 476)
  • MS-DRG 012: Tracheotomy for Face, Mouth, and Neck Diagnoses with CC (RW 3.03; Rank 584)
  • MS-DRG 020: Intracranial Vascular Procedures with Principal Diagnosis of Hemorrhage with MCC (RW 8.44; Rank 696)
  • MS-DRG 021: Intracranial Vascular Procedures with Principal Diagnosis of Hemorrhage with CC (RW 6.21; Rank 696)
  • MS-DRG 927: Extensive Burns or Full Thickness Burns with Mechanical Ventilation 96+ Hours with Skin Graft (RW 13.74; Rank 629)
  • MS-DRG 929: Full Thickness Burn with Skin Graft or Inhalation Injury without CC/MCC (RW 2.01; Rank 728)
  • MS-DRG 023: Craniotomy with Major Device Implant/Acute Complex Central Nervous System Principal Diagnosis with MCC or Chemo Implant (RW 4.94; Rank 469)
  • MS-DRG 024: Craniotomy with Major Device Implant/Acute Complex Central Nervous System Principal Diagnosis without MCC (RW 3.26; Rank 212)
  • MS-DRG 007: Lung Transplant (RW 9.45; Rank 689)
  • MS-DRG 076: Viral Meningitis without CC/MCC (RW 0.83; Rank 510)
  • MS-DRG 461: Bilateral or Multiple Major Joint Procedures of Lower Extremity with MCC (RW 4.56; Rank 187)
  • MS-DRGs 799, 800, 801: Splenectomy w MCC, w CC, w/o CC/MCC (RW 5.11, 2.53, 1.59; Ranks 666, 709, 620)
  • MS-DRG 177: Respiratory Infections & Inflammations with MCC (RW 2.05; Rank 35)
  • MS-DRG 178: Respiratory Infections & Inflammations with CC (RW 1.49; Rank 132)
  • MS-DRG 179: Respiratory Infections & Inflammations without CC/MCC (RW 1.01; Rank 119)

To see the complete original listings (on the RAC websites), visit this page.

Or, to find a more useful listing of all their posted issues, visit  this page on eduTrax.  (Registration required.)

Still No Medical Necessity Reviews

All of the above approved issues still include this caveat:

(At this time, Medical Necessity excluded from review).

As faithful readers know, however, Medical Necessity Reviews could be approved by CMS at any time now, since the CMS RAC Review Phase-In Strategy allows for such audits in calendar 2010.

We will shortly post further analysis, in an overview of the DRG Validations posted to date by all four RACs.

RACs Affect MDs Also

So here we are, at a facility of about 500 beds, in a room with the CEO, the CFO, the Corporate Compliance Officer for the parent firm, some outside auditors, at least one lawyer, four key MDs for the facility, and the VP of Medical Affairs, all gathered to discuss the RACs — the impending attack of the RACs. Yes, our favorite subject, go figure. We give our now fairly memorized presentation about the RACs, how they began, what they did, what they are doing now, and what they’ll be doing in the near future. Probably at their doorstep, too.

What the MDs were especially astonished to find out is that THEIR incomes are going to affected, as well as the hospital’s. Not only were they unaware of how the RACs operated, but they were also unaware of how the RAC could reach into their pockets, THRU the hospital claims.

Here’s what we mean:

When a RAC disallows and takes back reimbursement for a hospital claim, any attendant professional services (i.e., the MD’s billings) can ALSO be disallowed, and taken back, especially if the claim was disallowed due to lack of documentation to support Medical Necessity.

After we finished the presentation, the VP of Medical Affairs, an MD, asked if we knew how many MDs in the country are even aware of the risk that the RACs pose to their livelihood. Our answer: we don’t have a number, but we are certain it is very small, ridiculously so. Less than ten percent? Yes, we think that is probably about right.

One of the MDs then said, “Wait a minute… so what you’re telling us is that for the first time, it is in the interest of the physician to work directly with the hospital to insure that they get reimbursed correctly?”

Yes, that’s EXACTLY what we are saying. Both MDs and hospitals need to pay attention. This is not just about coding! The hospital is dependant upon the coder to properly code a claim. The coder is totally dependant upon the MD for the documentation for that claim.

Physicians must learn at least some of the Case Management Protocols, which are now more than ever being required to ensure proper, optimized reimbursement. (Or in some cases, any reimbursement AT ALL.)

We’ll be discussing this more, in further posts. You might also wish to read some of our previous posts, such as these:

RAC Defense

Likely RAC Targets

What’s Medical Necessity? Try…40%

If you’re new here, you may not be aware that we are still completing a series of Live eLearning eVents (webinars) based on RACs. We’ve completed eleven, to date, and have ten more in the queue.

Click HERE to see a list of all courses available, online. Click HERE to download a catalog of courses.

Click HERE to see a FREE PREVIEW of our course at www.myedutrax.com about Documentation & Coding Hot Spots in the current RAC environment.

RAC Defense

Maybe you’ve already thought about this, but there’s lots to learn… so we’ll keep making suggestions…

RAC defense will include many of the areas we all deal  with day-in and day-out, and a few which may be new to you — such as development and implementation of a Hospital wide Case Management Protocol.

Oh. Never heard of it…………..??  Read on…

Atlanta based, St. Joseph’s Hospital reached agreement with the DOJ and OIG (for a mere $26 Million) on issues relating to patient admission status (Observation vs Inpatient) and included in their CIA is the requirement to adopt a Case Management Protocol. To see what is involved go to www.myedutrax.com, Register (it’s free, takes a minute), then search for “St. Joseph’s”.

Wisest course is to consider such a step for development and implementation before it is “too late”.

More details to come…

Get All New Posts by eMail

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

post categories

Clicky Web Analytics

Weblogs Directory

Powered by FeedBurner

 Subscribe in your own
Favorite RSS Reader

Pageviews in 2010 =