Tag Archives: defense lawyer

Internal Medicine Specialists Should Be Aware of Impending Medicare Audits

6 Indest-2008-3Coming to a medical practice near you. . . It’s scary, it’s horrible, and it could cost you a lot of money!

It’s the dreaded Comprehensive Error Rate Testing (CERT) audit.

The Horror! The Horror!

First Coast Service Options, the Medicare contractor for Florida, announced a new prepayment audit program that will impact Internal Medicine Specialists. The prepayment program is focused on Initial and Subsequent Hospital Evaluation and Management Services, CPT Codes 99223 and 99233. The program is being launched due to the high CERT error rate associated with these codes.

The audits will start on October 21, 2014.

What is the CERT Program?

CMS created the CERT program to measure the paid claims error rate for Medicare claims submitted to Medicare administrative contractors, carriers, durable medical equipment regional carriers, and Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs). CMS receives more than two billion claims annually. The CERT program randomly selects approximately 120,000 of these claims for review to determine whether the claims were properly paid.

Statistical samples are selected and the CERT documentation contractor (CDC) submits documentation requests to those providers who submitted affected claims. Once the requested documentation has been received, the information is forwarded to the CERT review contractor (CRC) for review. The CRC will review the claims and supporting documentation to measure compliance with Medicare coverage, coding and billing rules. Click here to read my previous blog on the CERT Program.

How Internal Medicine Specialists Can Avoid CERT Audits.

First Coast is only targeting Internal Medicine Specialists as their data analysis suggests the specialty is the primary contributor to an elevated CERT error rate. Errors are normally cause by insufficient documentation to justify the service.

Healthcare providers designated as Internal Medicine with First Coast Service Options need to pay special attention to this audit program and the documentation requirements for billing 99223 and 99233 codes. If you find yourself or your practice the target of a CERT audit, click here for tips on how to respond.

Our Thoughts on the CERT Program.

In working with the CERT Program, we have been pleasantly surprised when our personal phone calls to have been answered and actual accurate information provided, as well as letters and documents we provided being promptly acknowledged. Like with any other audit, however, we urge those being audited to seek the advice of an experienced health law attorney who may be able to assist in heading off and avoiding a more serious investigation or a large repayment demand.

Comments?

Have you heard of CERT audits? Has your practice encountered a CERT audit? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Don’t Wait Until It’s Too Late; Consult with a Health Law Attorney Experienced in Medicare and Medicaid Issues Now.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm represent healthcare providers in Medicare audits, ZPIC audits and RAC audits throughout Florida and across the U.S. They also represent physicians, medical groups, nursing homes, home health agencies, pharmacies, hospitals and other healthcare providers and institutions in Medicare and Medicaid investigations, audits, recovery actions and termination from the Medicare or Medicaid Program.

For more information please visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com or call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.

Copyright © 1996-2014 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

“Doctor of Death” Trial Could Ignite Stricter Oversight in the Healthcare Industry

8 Indest-2008-5By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

On paper, one Detroit-area oncologist appeared to be a wildly successful professional with impeccable medical credentials. According to his medical practice’s website, he went to medical school at Cornell Medical College, did an internal medicine residency at Maimonides Medical Center in Brooklyn, New York, and then completed a medical oncology fellowship at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, a very well-respected facility. The oncologist ran a professional practice of seven locations with a total of 60 employees.

However, on September 24, 2014, his reputation and accolades faded when he pleaded guilty to intentionally and wrongfully diagnosing healthy patients with cancer. He also admitted to giving these patients chemotherapy solely for the purpose of making a profit.

For healthcare professionals, this act is an obvious violation of the oath they took to serve their patients and to do no harm. But, if this oncologist is found guilty, you can be assured that oncologists, physicians, dentists, and all other healthcare professionals will be under a microscope to help ensure that something this egregious and dishonest does not happen again.

Allegations Against the Oncologist.

The details of the allegations, obtained from various employee whistleblowers, range from the mundane to the horrific. In the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) complaint against the oncologist, there are dozens of examples of his wrongdoing described. The activities of which the doctor is accused include:

- Administration of unnecessary chemotherapy to patients in remission;
– Deliberate misdiagnosis of patients as having cancer to justify unnecessary cancer treatment;
– Administration of chemotherapy to end-of-life patients who would not benefit from the treatment;
– Deliberate misdiagnosis of patients without cancer to justify expensive testing;
– Fabrication of other diagnoses such as anemia and fatigue to justify unnecessary hematology treatments; and
– Distribution of controlled substances to patients without medical necessity.

There is also an issue of Medicare fraud. For the past six years, the doctor is accused of seeing a large number of patients per day. He would then bill every patient at the highest possible billing code, even though he allegedly only spent a few minutes with each patient. The amount of money related to the doctor’s Medicare fraud scheme is a staggering $35 million.

Click here to read the FBI’s complaint against the oncologist.

Charges.

The oncologist is facing a an abundance of legal issues. In all, the oncologist pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court to 13 counts of healthcare fraud, one count of conspiracy to pay or receive kickbacks and two counts of money laundering. He will be sentenced in February 2015 and faces up to 175 years in prison.

Other Healthcare Providers Could Pay for Oncologist’s Greed.

If the oncologist is found guilty, the aftereffects will surely be felt throughout the industry. For example, healthcare providers will need to more closely watch their Medicare billing. Any reimbursement submitted to Medicare will be under tight scrutiny. Keep in mind that Medicare pays close attention to the percentage of patients billed at each level. If a physician bills for every patient at the highest level, it’s going to send up a huge red flag. If you or your practice is being audited, click here for some tips on responding to a Medicare audit.

On top of the extensive healthcare fraud charges, the oncologist allegedly misled, endangered, and injured his patients. He betrayed the trust and privilege given to him as a physician by society, all in the name of greed. According to an article in The Washington Post, more than one patient died under the care of the oncologist. These families are now left to figure out whether their loved ones actually had cancer and died of chemotherapy complications, or whether they died of an actual cancerous ailment.

It’s crucial to remember that cutting corners to make a profit as a healthcare professional leads to great ramifications. Once a healthcare professional’s license and reputation are questioned, it is not an industry one can easily get back into.

Comments?

In your opinion, what is the worst offense this oncologist allegedly committed? Explain. Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced with Investigations of Health Professionals and Providers.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to physicians, nurses, nurse practitioners, CRNAs, dentists, pharmacists, psychologists and other health providers in accusations of disruptive behavior, Department of Health (DOH) investigations, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigations, FBI investigations, Medicare investigations, Medicaid investigations and other types of investigations of health professionals and providers.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Sullivan, Gail. “‘Death Doctor’ Who Profited from Unnecessary Chemotherapy for Fake Cancers Could Resume Practice in 5 Years.” The Washington Post. (October 1, 2014). From: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/10/01/death-doctor-who-profited-from-unnecessary-chemotherapy-for-fake-cancers-could-resume-practice-in-three-years/

“Prominent Michigan Cancer Doctor Pleads Guilty: ‘I Knew That It Was Medically Unnecessary’.” The Inquisitr. (September 24, 2014). From: http://www.inquisitr.com/1485160/prominent-michigan-cancer-doctor-pleads-guilty-i-knew-that-it-was-medically-unnecessary/

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2014 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Cyber Attack at Community Health Systems Affects 4.5 Million Patients-Could This be a New Trend?

Patricia's Photos 013By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar  in Health Law

On August 18, 2014, Community Health Systems, a Tennessee-based hospital chain that has 206 hospitals in 29 states, announced that its computer system was hacked. According to a number of news reports, an outside group of hackers, originating in China, used highly sophisticated malware and technology to steal 4.5 million patients’ non-medical data. The hackers were able to obtain patients’ names, Social Security numbers, addresses, birth dates, and telephone numbers.

According to the Orlando Sentinel, in Florida, St. Cloud Surgical Associates, St. Cloud Medical Group, and Urology Associates of St. Cloud were among the practices where medical data was stolen. The article did not mention how many patients in Florida were affected. Click here to read the story from the Orlando Sentinel.

How Community Health Systems will Handle Being Hacked.

According to The New York Times, Community Health Systems believes the attacks happened from April to June 2014. The company will be notifying affected patients and agencies under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).

The hospital system is now working with a security company to investigate the incident and help prevent future attacks. Federal law enforcement agents are also investigating the incident. Click here to read the entire article from The New York Times.

Because this breach affected more than 500 individuals, it will soon be posted on the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Wall of Shame. The law requires that any breach involving 500 or more individuals be publicly posted. To learn more on the Wall of Shame, click here for my previous blog.

Protect Your Practice As Best You Can From Cyber Attacks.

Cyber hacking in the medical community appears to be a crime of opportunity. Quickly there are becoming two types of companies: those that have been hacked and those that will be hacked.

While there is no way to guarantee protection from extrusion and external sources, there are steps that can be taken. For medical practices, many of these are required as part of a HIPAA risk assessment. Some areas to focus on include:

-    Background checks;
–    Comprehensive policies and procedures;
–    Vigilance when it comes to monitoring and data-leakage prevention tools; and
–    Employee education.

Medical practices are going to become bigger targets as the health care industry transitions to electronic health records. In addition, the hacking community is figuring out it is easier to hack a hospital or private practice, than it is a bank and you get the same information. To learn more on HIPAA risk assessments, click here.

Comments?

How do you protect your medical practice from hackers? Do you have regular risk assessments? Why or why not? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Contact a Health Law Attorney Experienced in Defending HIPAA Complaints and Violations.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm represent physicians, medical groups, nursing homes, home health agencies, pharmacies, hospitals and other health care providers and institutions in investigating and defending alleged HIPAA complaints and violations and in preparing Corrective Action Plans (CAPs).

For more information about HIPAA violations, electronic health records or corrective action plans (CAPs) please visit our website at http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com or call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001.

Sources:

Perlroth, Nicole. “Hack of Community Health Systems Affects 4.5 Million Patients.” The New York Times. (August 18, 2014). From: http://nyti.ms/1pFpujC

Kutscher, Beth. “Chinese Hackers Hit Community Health Systems; Other Vulnerable.” Modern Healthcare. (August 18, 2014). From: http://bit.ly/1BxsLqH

Jacobson, Susan. “St. Cloud Medical Patients’ Information Among Millions Stolen in Cyber Attack.” (August 18, 2014). From: http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/os-hospital-data-breach-st-cloud-20140818,0,3157319.story

Rose, Rachel. “Protecting Your Medical Practices From Cyber Threats.” Physicians Practice. (July 17, 2014). From: http://www.physicianspractice.com/blog/protecting-your-medical-practice-cyberthreats

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2014 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Watch Out for Legal Pitfalls Associated with Telemedicine

Lance Leider headshotBy Lance O. Leider, J.D., The Health Law Firm

With all the new technologies, mobile medical applications, expansion of access to health care under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and the emphasis on quality care, telemedicine is at the forefront of the health care industry.

Now is the time to educate yourself on the new opportunities in practicing telemedicine. As with any new health care business model, you also have to assess the risks and be sure you are complying with the ever increasing number of regulations.

Where Telemedicine Stands Today.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) can be credited for the telemedicine revival. In 2011, CMS issued a final rule permitting a more flexible process for credentialing and privileging practitioners who provide telemedicine services. Telemedicine escalated in 2013, when federal and state legislation and major insurers expanded the types of reimbursable telemedicine services. Now in 2014, there are more partnerships between insurers and health care delivery systems to provide patients access to specialists through telemedicine programs.
For example, WellPoint, Inc., and Aetna, Inc., among other health insurers, are letting millions of patients schedule online visits with health care professionals. These insurance companies are working together with companies that offer virtual visits with doctors who, in some states, can prescribe drugs for anything from sinus infections to back pain. According to Bloomberg, this is a major advancement for telemedicine. To read the entire article from Bloomberg, click here.

The Current Status of Telemedicine in Florida.

In March 2014, the Florida Boards of Medicine and Osteopathic Medicine adopted updated standards for practicing telemedicine. The final rule, 64B8-9.0141, Florida Administrative Code, defines telemedicine as:

the practice of medicine by a licensed Florida physician or physician assistant where patient care, treatment, or services are provided through the use of medical information exchanged from one site to another via electronic communications. Telemedicine shall not include the provision of health care services only through an audio only telephone, email messages, text messages, facsimile transmission, U.S. mail or other parcel service, or any combination thereof.

The rule states that the standard of care shall remain the same regardless of whether a physician provides services in person or by telemedicine. Also, those providing telemedicine services are responsible for the safety, security and adequacy of their equipment.

Several other parts of the new Florida telemedicine rule are worth noting:

1. Telemedicine is sufficient to establish a physician-patient relationship;
2. All regulations regarding patient confidentiality and record keeping are applicable;
3. The rule specifically exempts medical advice given by emergency responders including EMTs, paramedics and emergency dispatchers;
4. The rule also does not apply to physicians or physician assistants providing emergency care under conditions requiring immediate medical care; and
5. Florida law presently prohibits prescribing controlled substances via telemedicine.


Telemedicine and the Potential Legal Issues.

As telemedicine grows, so will the oversight and scrutiny by state medical boards and federal and state regulatory agencies. Here are some areas to be mindful of:

- Reimbursement: This is continuously an issue with telemedicine. Medicare reimbursement for telemedicine services is limited and generally requires face-to-face contact between patients and providers. Medicaid reimbursement varies from state-to-state, and only about 20 states have enacted statutes that require reimbursement for certain telemedicine services. This means health care providers need to review Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement policies, state health insurance regulations, and provider payer contract requirements so that they are aware of the reimbursement requirements that may affect their billing. Educate yourself on what will and what won’t be reimbursed, and only submit compliant claims to avoid audits.

- Fraud and Abuse: As a telemedicine provider, you will most likely initiate business arrangements between distinct health care entities that may include the lease of equipment or the use of a product owned, in part, by physicians. Arrangements like this need to be written with federal fraud and abuse laws in mind, including the Anti-Kickback Statute and the Stark Law. For more advice on telemedicine-related fraud issues, review advisory opinions issued by the Office of the Inspector General (OIG).

- Medical Staff Bylaws: Health care organizations that depend on information from a distant-site hospital or telemedicine entity to credential and privilege telemedicine practitioners must revise their medical staff bylaws and policies to include criteria for granting privileges to distant practitioners, and a procedure for applying the criteria. Additions should also include what category of the medical staff distant-site telemedicine practitioners will join, the level of involvement they may have in medical staff committees, and what procedural rights they should be given.

- Credentialing and Privileging: Under CMS’ final rule, health care organizations may rely on the credentialing and privileging decisions of distant-site hospitals or the information provided by other telemedicine entities when determining privileges for distant-site practitioners who provide telemedicine services, as long as certain conditions are met, including a compliant written agreement.

- Patient Privacy: Providers are responsible for ensuring they have secure communication channels, implementing business associate and other confidentiality and privacy agreements, educating staff regarding the appropriate use of telemedicine, and understanding how and what patient information is being collected and stored.

- Compliance with State Requirements: Most states require physicians engaging in telemedicine to be licensed in the state where the patient is located. It would be wise for health care organizations to seek the legal guidance of an experienced health law attorney to navigate individual state requirements.

- Interactions with Pain Management Laws: Our practice has seen many physicians become the subject of some kind of government investigation or action resulting from the remote practice of medicine in a pain management setting. These telemedicine rules do not alter the status quo in pain management. Physicians are still required to see patients in a face-to-face encounter in order to prescribe controlled substances for the treatment of pain. There are discussions among the members of the Florida  Boards of Medicine and Osteopathic Medicine to permit limited prescribing of controlled substances through telemedicine. However, the boundaries of a future rule are unclear. Considering the hard-line stance the Boards have taken toward pain management in general, it is unlikely that any final rule would authorize the remote practice of pain management.

Health care providers need to stay mindful of the listed legal issues, and any others that may come up. It is important when practicing telemedicine to ensure your services are compliant, and you appropriately protect patient safety and privacy.

Comments?

Does your practice use telemedicine? In your opinion what are the benefits and what are the difficulties of telemedicine? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced in Representing Health Care Professionals and Providers.

At the Health Law Firm we provide legal services for all health care providers and professionals. This includes physicians, nurses, dentists, psychologists, psychiatrists, mental health counselors, Durable Medical Equipment suppliers, medical students and interns, hospitals, ambulatory surgical centers, pain management clinics, nursing homes, and any other health care provider. We represent facilities, individuals, groups and institutions in contracts, sales, mergers and acquisitions.

The services we provide include reviewing and negotiating contracts, business transactions, professional license defense, representation in investigations, credential defense, representation in peer review and clinical privileges hearings, Medicare and Medicaid audits, commercial litigation, and administrative hearings. To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

French, Marie. “The Doctor Will Click on You Now.” Bloomberg. (July 13, 2014). From: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-14/the-doctor-will-click-on-you-now.html

Kadzielski, Mark and Kim, Jee-Young. “Telemedicine: Many Opportunities, Many Legal Issues, Many Risks.” JD Supra. (July 30, 2014). From: http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/telemedicine-many-opportunities-many-l-18993/

About the Author: Lance O. Leider is an attorney with The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Avenue, Altamonte Springs, Florida 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2014 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Sexual Misconduct by Rogue Employees Can Cost Big Money: Your Responsibility as an Employer

2 Indest-2009-1By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

Johns Hopkins Health System agreed to shell out $190 million to more than 7,000 women and girls, in one of the largest settlements ever in the United States involving sexual misconduct by a physician.

A gynecologist, practicing in a Baltimore-based Johns Hopkins Hospital, one of the nation’s most prestigious medical institutions, was accused of using a tiny camera to secretly take videos and pictures of his patients. The doctor worked at the hospital for 25 years, but was fired after admitting to the misconduct and surrendering his recording devices to authorities.

This is a chilling example of how employers can be held responsible for “rogue” employees clearly not working under the consent of the employer. In general, employers have a responsibility to properly supervise their employees’ actions. As in this case, failure to do so can cost millions.

Background of the Case.

According to the Wall Street Journal, a co-worker tipped off Johns Hopkins officials that the gynecologist was wearing a pen around his neck that looked like a camera. In February 2013, an investigation revealed that the gynecologist secretly used the device in question to photograph and videotape thousands of women and girls during pelvic exams. The investigation found that the doctor’s camera captured 1,200 videos and 140 images of his patients, that were then stored on his computer. The doctor was fired in February 2013, and committed suicide days later.

Click here to read the entire article from the Wall Street Journal.

“Rogue” Employee.

In this case, Johns Hopkins states that insurance will cover the entire $190 million settlement. The preliminary agreement is awaiting final approval from a judge. In a statement, Johns Hopkins’ attorney said that the hospital was unaware of the doctor’s conduct, and that he had become a “rogue” employee. The hospital sent out letters of apology to the gynecologist’s patient list, calling the incident a “breach of trust.”

Click here to read all of the statements from Johns Hopkins Medicine in regard to this incident.

Employer’s Responsibility.

The lawsuit against Johns Hopkins alleged that the hospital failed to properly supervise the doctor and should have known of his alleged misconduct.

This situation brings up an interesting point, even though the employee was acting on his own accord, the health system would still likely have been held liable if the case was not settled.

Employers are generally “vacariously liable” for their employees’ actions. The basic idea of vicarious liability or the doctrine of respondeat superior is that an employer is held responsible for the negligent acts of its employee that cause injuries to a third party, provided that such acts were committed during the course of and within the scope of the employment.

To establish that the employee’s conduct was within the scope of employment:

1. The conduct must have occurred substantially within the time and space limits authorized by the employment;
2. The employee must have been motivated, at least partially, by a purpose to serve the employer; and
3. The act must have been of a kind that the employee was hired to perform.

In certain circumstances, including the example of the gynecologist, an employer’s vicarious liability can extend to intentional or even criminal acts committed by the employee.

Vicarious liability is a powerful concept and, as evident by the Johns Hopkins case, can result in an employer being responsible for significant sums of money. Employers should institute policies which curb activities that could be injurious to others. The employer has a responsibility to monitor employees and immediately investigate any suspicious activity.

Despite the fact that Johns Hopkins acted quickly, the hospital system will still most likely be left holding a settlement sum of $190 million for actions of an employee.

Comments?

As an employer, how do you make sure your employees aren’t acting on their own or violating company policies and procedures? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Contact Health Attorneys Experienced in Health Law and Employment Law.

The Health Law Firm represents both employers and employees in the health care industry in defending allegations of sexual misconduct and other complaints from employees and patients. We represent employers in unemployment compensation hearings, in defending against EEOC (discrimination) complaints, and in defending litigation involving wage and hour disputes, as well as other types of contract or employment litigation. We also can investigate such allegations and attempt to negotiate settlements where warranted. Our attorneys represent individuals and institutions in litigation, civil or administrative, state or federal.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Sources:

Linderman, Juliet. “Hopkins Pays $190M in Pelvis Exam Pix Settlement.” Associated Press. (July 22, 2014). From: http://apne.ws/UquXOI

Levitz, Jennifer. “Johns Hopkins Agrees to $190 Million Exam-Photos Settlement.” Wall Street Journal. (July 21, 2014). From: http://online.wsj.com/articles/johns-hopkins-hospital-agrees-to-190-million-exam-photos-settlement-1405961572

Johns Hopkins Hospital. “Statement from Johns Hopkins Medicine on the recent news surrounding Nikita Levy, M.D.” Hopkins Medicine. (July 21, 2014). From: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/Nikita_Levy.html

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

 

The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.
Copyright © 1996-2014 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

Pediatricians Who Are Targets of Medicaid Audits Should Request Hearings on the Final Audit Report Results

00011_RT8By George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law

We have recently been contacted by several pediatric practices that were subject to Medicaid audits. In several cases, the pediatricians received the final audit reports (FARs) stating that they owed Medicaid refunds, because of overbillings, in the tens of thousands of dollars.

With such demands for repayment of the alleged overpayments also come:

  1. Fines;
2. Penalties;
3. Requirements to sign agreements to refrain from such practices in the future;
4. Requirements to have personnel retrained; and
5. The specter of future audits.

In many cases, Medicare and Medicaid auditors may swiftly review supporting medical records and overlook key components that support the level of services (or CPT codes) that were billed, erroneously downgrading the code or disallowing the charge completely. Other times the pediatric or medical practice may have only provided partial records and have left out some key records that would support the codes billed.

Challenging the Determination.

Unfortunately, after receipt of the FAR, the only hope of challenging the determination would come by filing a written request or petition for a formal hearing in, specifically, a Medicaid case. In Medicare cases, other interim reviews or appeals are available.

If you have additional records you failed to provide, or if after a thorough review of the records you did provide show that all of the elements of a CPT code you billed (e.g., 99204 or 99205) were documented, then we recommend that you immediately retain the services of a board certified health lawyer experienced with Medicare and Medicaid audits to file a petition for you. Be sure a written request or petition for a formal hearing is filed within the time stated in the letter you receive, even if you must retain an attorney afterwards. Remember that the request must be in writing and must be received by the agency at the address specified before the date in the letter has passed.

You can always work out a settlement agreement, repayment agreement, or agreement for a different resolution of the situation. What you can’t do is to go back and get back your hearing rights after they have expired.

Steps to Take if you Receive Notice of an Audit.

What you should do immediately upon receiving notice of an audit:

 1. Retain the services of a board certified health lawyer who is experienced with such audits.

 2.  In a timely manner, provide all relevant documents pertaining to the audit, properly labeled and pages numbered (note:  in many instances, this may include more than just the minimum documents the audit requested).

 3. Watch for any interim, initial or preliminary audit reports (PARs), and be prepared to rebut it in detail if it requests a refund.

 4. If you receive a FAR demanding a repayment, be prepared to hire a board certified health lawyer who is experienced with such audits, if you have not already done so.

 5. If you disagree with the findings in the FAR, be sure the agency receives your request for a formal hearing to challenge the determination, prior to the date given in the FAR or demand letter.

For additional details, pointers and tips on this subject you may click here to read the prior blog we have published.

For information, details, pointers and tips on the subject of Medicare audits, you may click here to read the prior blog we have published on this.

Comments?

Do you know what to do if you are the target of a Medicaid audit? Did you know about requesting a hearing on the final audit report results? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced with Medicare and Medicaid Cases.

Attorneys with The Health Law Firm represent physicians, medical groups, nursing homes, home health agencies, pharmacies, hospitals and other healthcare providers and institutions in Medicare and Medicaid investigations, audits, recovery actions and termination from the Medicare or Medicaid Program. We also handle Medicare audits, ZPIC audits and RAC audits throughout Florida and across the U.S.

Our attorneys also represent health care professionals and health facilities in qui tam or whistleblower cases both in defending such claims and in bringing such claims. We have developed relationships with recognized experts in health care accounting, health care financing, utilization review, medical review, filling, coding, and other services that assist us in such matters. We have represented doctors, nurses and others as relators in bringing qui tam or whistleblower cases, as well.

To contact The Health Law Firm, please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. http://www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.

Copyright © 1996-2014 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.

 

Disruptive Physicians: Nobody Likes a Nuisance

IndestBy George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law and Christopher E. Brown, J.D., The Health Law Firm

Identifying and eliminating disruptive physicians has become a paramount concern of many hospitals and healthcare systems. Disruptive physicians hinder the safe and orderly operation of a healthcare facility and are considered a threat to the safety of patients. Disruptive behavior can impact staff morale and can increase the risk of liability to all employers.

A recent New York case demonstrates this. According to a journal for surgeons, a New York doctor is being held responsible for an ongoing worker’s compensation bill as the result of a violent outburst he directed toward a physician assistant (PA). The physician allegedly lost his temper during an open-heart surgery when the physician assistant accidentally suctioned some heart tissue. The physician allegedly threatened that he would “throw the physician assistant through the wall” if it happened again.

The physician assistant has claimed that the threat deeply affected her ability to perform her job, as well as put the patient’s safety at risk. A psychologist diagnosed the PA with post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) caused by the incident. Unable to work because of the trauma allegedly caused by the disruptive physician, the PA now reportedly collects $2,415 a week in workers’ compensation.

To read the full article from Outpatient Surgery, click here.

Implications of Disruptive Behavior.

Disruptive behavior from a physician can lead to dire consequences for both the physician and his or her employer. Lawsuits and liabilities, such as those in the New York case discussed above, can detract from a safe, cooperative, and professional healthcare environment.

Disruptive behavior can negatively affect the quality of patient care. Hospitals claim that this happens because of conduct that:

-    Disrupts or impedes the operations of the hospital;

-    Adversely affects the ability of others on the healthcare team to do their jobs;

-    Creates an unprofessional or hostile work environment for hospital employees;

-    Interferes with coworkers’ ability to practice competently;

-    Prevents effective communications among healthcare providers and staff;

-    Disrupts the continuity of care a patient receives; and

-    Adversely affect the community’s confidence in the hospital’s ability to provide quality patient care.

Being accused of being a disruptive physician may lead to adverse action against clinical privileges, action to drop the physician from insurance panels, consequential action by the state medical board or licensing authority, loss of specialty certification, termination of employment contracts and other various consequences.

What Conduct May Cause One to be Labeled a Disruptive Physician?

A hospital’s creed, ethical statement, or code of conduct, as well as Joint Commission Standards, and medical staff bylaws can define what constitutes disruptive behavior. Case reports, hospital policies and actual cases in which we have defended physicians demonstrate the types of acts that can be used to label a person as “disruptive.” Disruptive behavior includes, but is not limited to:

-    Verbal attacks that are personal, irrelevant to hospital operations, or exceed the bounds of professional conduct;

-    Shouting, yelling, or the use of profanity;

-    Verbally demeaning, rude or insulting conduct, including exhibiting signs of disdain or disgust;

-    Inappropriate physical conduct, such as pushing, shoving, grabbing, hitting, making obscene gestures, or throwing objects;

-    Inappropriate comments or illustrations made in patient medical records or other official documents, impugning the quality of care in hospital facilities, or attacking particular medical staff members, personnel, or policies;

-    Belittling remarks about the patient care provided by the hospital or any healthcare provider in the presence or vicinity of patients or their families;

-    Non-constructive criticism that is addressed to the recipient in such a way as to intimidate, undermine confidence, belittle, or imply stupidity or incompetence;

-    Refusal to accept, or disparaging or disgruntled acceptance of, medical staff assignments;

-    Inappropriately noisy or loud behavior in patient areas;

-    Making sexual or racial jokes;

-    Physically touching another professional, nurse or staff member, especially those of the opposite sex;

-    Making sexually suggestive remarks;

-    Commenting on another person’s body parts;

-    Threatening violence to another;

-    Throwing surgical equipment, medical supplies, charts, or anything else at or around anyone else; or

-    Other disruptive, abusive, or unprofessional behavior.

I previously wrote a two-part blog series detailing the types of conduct considered disruptive, as well as the consequences associated with disruptive behavior and how you as a physician can avoid such pitfalls. To read part one of the blog series, click here. To read part two of the blog series, click here.

Physicians: Proactively Educate Yourself.

It’s wise to review your hospital’s or institution’s policies on disruptive behavior. Arming yourself with the knowledge necessary to avoid such accusations is imperative in protecting your reputation and career.

No one lives in a glass house, but pretend you do. Someone can always observe your actions in the office or hospital. Once you have been labeled a disruptive physician, others may be closely, at times, scrutinizing you for anything you may do wrong. You will make yourself a target for possible false allegations and accusations. The healthcare industry is a demanding and stressful field. It’s understandable that potential outbursts can occur; control yourself and don’t let them.

Comments?

Have you ever been accused of being a disruptive physician? Have you ever been around one? What are some proactive tactics physicians can take to prevent any outbursts or behavioral conduct that would be deemed as disruptive? Please leave any thoughtful comments below.

Contact Health Law Attorneys Experienced with Investigations of Health Professionals and Providers.

The attorneys of The Health Law Firm provide legal representation to physicians, nurses, nurse practitioners, CRNAs, dentists, pharmacists, psychologists and other health providers in accusations of disruptive behavior, Department of Health (DOH) investigations, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) investigations, FBI investigations, Medicare investigations, Medicaid investigations and other types of investigations of health professionals and providers.

To contact The Health Law Firm please call (407) 331-6620 or (850) 439-1001 and visit our website at www.TheHealthLawFirm.com.

Source:

Burger, Jim. “Doc Threatens Physician’s Assistant During Open Heart Surgery: I’m Going to Put Your Through the Wall.” Outpatient Surgery. (July 14, 2014). From: http://www.outpatientsurgery.net/surgical-facility-administration/legal-and-regulatory/doc-threatens-physician-s-assistant-during-open-heart-surgery-i-m-going-to-put-you-through-the-wall–07-14-14

About the Author: George F. Indest III, J.D., M.P.A., LL.M., is Board Certified by The Florida Bar in Health Law. He is the President and Managing Partner of The Health Law Firm, which has a national practice. Its main office is in the Orlando, Florida, area. www.TheHealthLawFirm.com The Health Law Firm, 1101 Douglas Ave., Altamonte Springs, FL 32714, Phone: (407) 331-6620.

“The Health Law Firm” is a registered fictitious business name of George F. Indest III, P.A. – The Health Law Firm, a Florida professional service corporation, since 1999.

Copyright © 1996-2014 The Health Law Firm. All rights reserved.