 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
HEADLINES
Wednesday,
October 21, 2009
Click on a headline below for the
full story.
On
The Front Lines
CCH®
Health Care Compliance Integrated
Library
The Health Care Compliance
Integrated Library delivers the
latest information on health law.
The Library includes seven
invaluable titles:
- Civil
False Claims and Qui Tam Actions
- An essential tool for
bringing or defending Qui Tam
action.
- Clinical
Research Compliance Manual: An
Administrative Guide -
Essential guidance on the laws
and regulations affecting
clinical research and trials.
- Defending
and Preventing Health Care Fraud
and Abuse Cases: An Attorney's
Guide - Clear, expert
guidance on protecting against
charges of health care fraud and
abuse.
- Health
Care Fraud and Abuse Compliance
Manual - Giving health
care providers a clear
perspective on fraud and abuse
laws, written in plain-language.
- Health
Law and Compliance Update -
Find the latest information on
emerging issues. Each section is
authored by an expert in the
area and includes in-depth
analysis of the latest health
law and compliance issues.
- Hospital
Contracts Manual -
Expert, current know-how in
dealing with numerous hospital
contract scenarios.
- Hospital
Law Manual - Health Law
expertise covering treatment and
payment issues in the delivery
of health care services.
For more details, contact
your sales rep.
|
Journal of Health Care Compliance September/October 2009 Volume 11, Number 5
In addition to regularly featured columns such as HIPAA, electronic resources, and compliance and quality, the September/October 2009 issue of the Journal of Health Care Compliance includes the following articles:
- Self-discovered Overpayments: Do I Have to Give the Money Back?, written by Donald H. Romano, discusses various civil and criminal statutes and an entity's obligation to self-report and refund overpayments.
- Inside Criminal Minds, written by Allan P. DeKaye, looks at those that have committed health care fraud and examines the traits that may lead to criminal behavior.
- Cultural Competency Compliance Issues in Health Care, written by Maria B.J. Chun, focuses on the federal and state requirements for health care entities related to cultural competency.
- Compliance with CMS "Never Event" Billing Requirements, written by Lisa M. Silveria, discusses the need to develop a multidisciplinary approach to remain compliant with "never event" billing requirements.
Learn
more. Subscribers only
Not a subscriber? Subscribe
today.
|
The CCH HIPAA Security Guide October 2009 update
- Administration and enforcement of the Security Rules has been delegated to the HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR), effective August 2009. Previously delegated to CMS, the move consolidates Privacy and Security Rules enforcement. OCR already enforces the Privacy
Rules, and the added responsibility is expected to increase efficiencies in the department’s efforts to ensure that health information privacy is protected, according to a press release from HHS.
- A consumer information organization called Consumers Checkbook was not entitled to HHS’ records for all Medicare claims submitted by physicians during 2004 because the records are
exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), according to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
- Effective September 23, 2009, HHS updated its guidance on security technology based on public comments. The update was part of the HHS interim final rule with request for comments on
breach notification issued on August 24, 2009.
- The FTC also published a final rule on August 25, 2009, effective September 24, 2009, regarding breach notification requirements for personal health records (PHR) vendors that are not
‘‘covered entities’’ or ‘‘business associates’’ under the Privacy Rules.
- To avoid overlap with the HHS regulations, HIPAA-covered entities and entities that engage in activities as business associates of HIPAA-covered entities will be subject only to HHS’ rule and not the
FTC’s rule.
Learn
more. Subscribers only
Not a subscriber? Subscribe
today.
|
|
Headlines
The shortage of primary care providers and healthcare reform – what compliance officers should be prepared for
Any form of health care reform likely
will result in more individuals having some form of insurance coverage.
As many as 46 to 47 million uninsured individuals may have insurance
coverage under health care reform. With many areas of the country
already without sufficient primary care provider capacity, how will
the system react? Will the lines at Emergency Departments at hospitals
be longer like in Massachusetts after it enacted its own form of health
care reform? Will more primary care physicians, like those in San
Francisco, seek to be concierge providers further exacerbating the
shortage?
A likely unintended consequence of health care reform is greater
difficulty in accessing primary care services. The concept of every
individual in the U.S. having a medical home is laudatory, but just
how will this happen when there already is a shortage of primary care
capacity? Early retirement by physicians and lack of sufficient nursing
school teachers does not help the situation.
Compliance officers should be prepared to address many of the
unintended consequences that health care reform likely will bring
as a result of a probable increasing primary care shortage, including
the following:
- Physician recruitment efforts will be much more difficult,
particularly in the primary care area. Compliance officers will need
to pay particular attention to these relationships and contracts to
ensure that they are consistent with applicable law and regulations,
as there will be an incentive to “push the envelope” to
get the recruit. It will be important to make sure fair market value
compensation analyses will keep pace.
- Contracts for emergency department physicians and allied
health professionals staffing and/or employment contracts in this
area will have to keep pace with the increasing patient loads in emergency
departments. Compensation and/or subsidies to physicians likely will
have to rise. A greater use of physician extenders will have to be
made. Emergency department redesign may be necessary, but where will
all the new professionals come from? Compliance officers will have
to keep abreast of these newly evolving relationships and whether
they are consistent with applicable law and regulations.
Reprinted with the permission of Paul R. DeMuro, Latham &
Watkins LLP, San Francisco and Los Angeles, CA, paul.demuro@lw.com
Read
IRN»
(ip access user) »
(Read Intelliconnect) »
New requirements effective for suppliers of medical equipment and supplies
Most suppliers of durable medical
equipment, prosthetics, orthotics and supplies (DMEPOS) were required
to have met new quality standards by October 1, 2009, and obtain a
surety bond by October 2, 2009, as required by the Medicare Prescription
Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) and the Balanced
Budget Act of 1997 (BBA).
In order to obtain Medicare billing privileges, DMEPOS suppliers
must become accredited by meeting Medicare's business and product-specific
service and quality standards. The business standards include: (1)
how the company is run, (2) how finances and staff performance are
managed, (3) how well the company takes care of its consumers, (4)
the safety of their products, and (5) whether the company’s
information management systems are in place. The product-specific
service standards include: (1) intake, (2) delivery and setup, (3)
training and instruction of the beneficiary and their caregiver, and
(4) follow-up service.
According to CMS, the vast majority of Medicare DMEPOS suppliers
have met the deadlines to apply and become accredited. CMS is continuing
to work to complete the evaluations of those suppliers whose accreditation
applications are still under review, which could take as long as 60
days. Suppliers wishing to participate in the Medicare DMEPOS competitive
bidding program must be fully accredited to submit a bid.
CMS-deemed accreditation organizations have been required by
the MMA to use these new quality standards to evaluate the applications
of thousands of DMEPOS suppliers during the past three years. More
than 50,000 DMEPOS suppliers (70 percent) have already been accredited.
The accreditation requirement applies to suppliers of durable
medical equipment, medical supplies, home dialysis supplies and equipment,
therapeutic shoes, parenteral/enteral nutrition, transfusion medicine
and prosthetic devices, prosthetics and orthotics unless a professional
exemption applies. Pharmacies, pedorthists, mastectomy fitters, orthopedic
fitters/technicians and athletic trainers must also comply.
Congress is considering extending the deadline for pharmacies
to meet this accreditation requirement to January 1, 2010, with the
exception of those pharmacies that plan to bid in the DMEPOS competitive
bidding program.
The BBA surety bond requirement requires certain DMEPOS suppliers
to obtain and maintain a $50,000 surety bond. The surety bond limits
the risk to the Medicare program from fraudulent equipment suppliers
and helps to ensure that Medicare beneficiaries receive medical items
that are “reasonable and necessary” from legitimate suppliers.
CMS Fact Sheet, Oct. 1, 2009
Read
IRN»
(ip access user) »
(Read Intelliconnect) »
Proposed, final rules protect patients' genetic information
Individuals’ genetic information
will have greater protections through an interim final rule recently
issued by CMS, the Employee Benefits Security Administration, the
Internal Revenue Service and proposed regulations issued by the Office
of Civil Rights (OCR) implementing the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination
Act of 2008 (GINA) (PubLNo 110-233).
GINA provisions. GINA protects individuals against
discrimination based on their genetic information in health coverage
(Title I) and employment (Title II). GINA established three rules
that generally prohibit a group health plan and a health insurance
issuer in the group market from: (1) increasing the group premium
or contribution amounts based on genetic information; (2) requesting
or requiring an individual or family member to undergo a genetic test;
and (3) requesting, requiring, or purchasing genetic information prior
to or in connection with enrollment, or at any time for underwriting
purposes.
Interim final rule. Under the interim final rule,
group health plans, health insurance issuers in the group and individual
markets, and issuers of Medicare supplemental policies cannot: increase
premiums for the group based on the results of one enrollee’s
genetic information, deny enrollment, impose pre-existing condition
exclusions, or do other forms of underwriting based on genetic information.
The interim regulations also prohibit group health plans and health
insurance issuers in the group and individual markets from requesting,
requiring, or buying genetic information for underwriting purposes
or in connection with enrollment; and asking individuals or family
members to undergo a genetic test.
OCR's proposed rule. OCR's proposed rule would
implement Section 105 of Title I of GINA regarding the privacy and
confidentiality of genetic information and amend the HIPAA Privacy
Rule to prohibit health plans from using or disclosing genetic information
for underwriting purposes. The proposed rule modifies the Privacy
Rule to (1) explicitly provide that genetic information is health
information for purposes of the Privacy Rule, (2) prohibit health
plans from using or disclosing protected health information for underwriting
purposes, (3) revise the provisions related to the Notice of Privacy
Practices for health plans that perform underwriting, (4) make a number
of conforming modifications to definitions and other provisions of
the Rule, and (5) make technical corrections to update the definition
of health plan.
HHS Press Release, Oct. 1, 2009; Interim final rule,
74 FR 51664, Oct. 7, 2009; Proposed rule, 74 FR 51698, Oct. 7, 2009;
Health Care Compliance Reporter ¶700,234 and ¶730,075, respectively.
Read
IRN»
(ip access user) »
(Read Intelliconnect) »
On The Front Lines
The Role of Data Monitoring Committees (DMCs) in Clinical Trials
by Patricia Brent, JD, MPH
The organization and management of a clinical research
program has many functional and complex parts and their roles are
ever-expanding. Data Monitoring Committees (DMCs) have been a component
of some clinical trials since at least the early 1960s but, until
recently, they were used primarily in large multi-centered trials
sponsored by federal agencies, such as the National Institutes for
Health (NIH), the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the Department
of Veterans’ Affairs (VA). Few clinical trials sponsored by
pharmaceutical or medical device manufacturers incorporated DMC oversight
into their protocols.
Today, the increasing importance of
including DMCs in clinical trials is the result of several factors:
(1) the growing number of industry-sponsored trials with mortality
or major morbidity endpoints; (2) increasing collaboration between
industry and government in sponsoring major clinical trials, resulting
in industry trials performed under the policies of the government
funding agencies, which often require DMCs; (3) heightened awareness
within the scientific community of problems in clinical trial conduct
and analysis that might lead to inaccurate and/or biased results,
especially when early termination for efficacy is a possibility, and
need for approaches to protect against such problems; and (4) concerns
of institutional review boards (IRBs) regarding on-going trial monitoring
and patient safety in multi-centered trials.
A DMC is an independent committee of scientists, physicians,
statisticians and community representatives that collect and analyze
the clinical data generated during the course of a clinical trial
to monitor for adverse effects and other clinical trends, such as
an indication that one treatment is significantly better than another,
especially when one “arm” of the trial involves a placebo
control that might: (1) warrant modification of the protocol or termination
of the trial, (2) warrant notification of the trial participants about
any new information that might affect their willingness to continue
participating in the trial, or (3) have an adverse effect on their
morbidity or mortality.
DMCs have become an important and integral part of the clinical
trial process. Ultimately, they protect the safety of the clinical
trial participant, as well as the integrity and validity of the study.
The policies and procedures for operating a DMC are important to their
overall success and, thus, guidance documents from federal agencies
and study sponsors must be followed to ensure compliance and effectiveness.
Read
IRN»
(ip access user) »
(Read Intelliconnect) »
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subscribe to NetNews
|
|
|
Receive the NetNews newsletters via e-mail and to stay up-to-date on all the latest developments.
|
|
About
This Newsletter
|
|
|
To access the IntelliConnect™ full text documents you must be a subscriber to
the Health
Care Portfolio Deluxe and the Health Care Compliance Integrated Library IntelliConnect product
(depending on the link).*
Links within news stories display full text documents including legislation, regulations, court decisions, rulings and government reports.
The first time you click on a link you will be
taken to the IntelliConnect login
page, where you will need to enter your ID and
password. Subsequent links will take you directly to
the desired document.
|
|
Want to Subscribe?
|
|
|
If you aren't a subscriber to the Health Care Portfolio Deluxe and the Health Care Compliance Integrated Library, call 800-449-9525 or let us contact you to receieve a free trial to allow you to click on the links within the news stories and see the full text documents.
|
|