CancerNetwork Members: Login | Register
Become a fan on  Facebook  Add us on  Google Plus Follow us on  Twitter Join us on LinkedIn Sign up for our Newsletters Subscribe to our RSS Feed

 

CancerNetwork SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
PUBLICATIONS
NEWS
PODCASTS
TOPICS
BLOGS
NURSES
PATIENTS
JOBS
CONFERENCES
CME
SUPPLEMENTS
 

Home » Practice Management

 

Proposed Cuts Lead to Radiology Practice Self-Analysis

By Whitney L.J. Howell | November 14, 2012

When CMS released its 2013 proposed Medicare payment cuts this month, no one in radiology was particularly surprised. Industry experts knew radiology settings and providers faced slashed reimbursement rates, and it’s now time for practices to assess just how affected they might be.

In the fee schedule, set for Jan. 1, 2013, implementation, CMS retained its proposed multiple procedure payment reduction (MPPR) of 25 percent to the professional component (PC) for CT, MRI, and ultrasound imaging conducted by one or more providers in the same practice on the same patient, during the same session, on the same day. The Medicare proposed cuts will also decrease overall payments to radiation therapy centers by 9 percent and reduce payments to radiation oncology providers by 7 percent.

(MORE: ‘Fiscal Cliff’ Deal Includes Medical Imaging Cuts)

Overall reaction, said Maurine S. Dennis, senior director of economics and health policy at the American College of Radiology, is that these proposed reductions are both arbitrary and complicated. The MPPR cut is creating significant angst, she said.

“It’s a cut — a cut to the professional component, so it’s real money out of our providers’ pockets,” she said. “The proposal deals a lot with subspecialists, and it’s complex. It’s going to take time to figure out how everything will shake out.”

The looming 25 percent MPPR cut isn’t the only problem, however, said Mike Mabry, executive director of the Radiology Business Management Association. CMS has also yet to publish any information or guidance about the new coding modifier it plans to implement for same-day, same-provider services. Currently, your coders use the -59 modifier to identify procedures done on the same day that are distinct from all others performed.

In addition, the agency has not released a definition for what it considers to be same-session, leaving practices to determine for themselves how best to process this type of claim. The best course of action, Mabry said, is for practices to conduct a self-assessment of how at-risk they are for MPPR PC payment cuts.

Practices that provide a higher level of tertiary care or other advanced diagnostic imaging services should conduct the most involved analyses of their same-day, same-session services. These settings, he said, will be the most vulnerable to the MPPR PC reduction and will feel the greatest impact on their bottom line.

“Individual practices should identify scenarios where the MPPR PC reduction and the new modifier could apply,” he said. “They’ll need to reach out to their billing system vendors to determine how those entities will respond to these cuts and changes in modifiers.”

Be sure to ask, Mabry advised, whether your billing vendor has designed a system or procedure that will handle this new modifier — when it is published — or if you will be required to manually process these claims yourself until an automated system becomes available.

Despite the reimbursement cuts, however, industry experts do not foresee any tangible impact on patient care, ACR’s Dennis said.

“Our doctors will do the work no matter what. They’ll be mad about it, but it’s to their credit that patients will get the care they need,” she said. “But it’s a double-edged sword because CMS looks at what the doctors will do and says that these reductions won’t affect access to care. Meanwhile, our colleagues are heavily impacted.”

In fact, she said, radiologists could begin to follow the growing trend in cardiology where more providers are shuttering their private practices and returning to hospital employment.

However, the door is still open, Dennis said, for more discussion at the legislative level. While the ACR plans to issue guidance in the coming weeks on how to face these reimbursement reductions, it will also work with political allies on Capitol Hill to determine whether it is possible to minimize the effect of these payment cuts on radiology.

“We’re doing work on the legislative side where we will get more bang for our buck,” she said. “We now know where CMS stands once again, so the focus is going to be on capitalizing the healthcare services our patients need.”
 

 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.

Related Articles

Radiologists’ New Approach to Managed Care Contracts

Radiology Managers Still Have Low Confidence in Reimbursement Rates

Index Shows Radiology Managers Still Have Low Confidence in Reimbursement Rates

Radiology Leadership: Proposed Reimbursement Cuts “Arbitrary”

Proposed Cuts Lead to Radiology Practice Self-Analysis

‘Fiscal Cliff’ Deal Includes Medical Imaging Cuts






 
TOPIC INDEX

Cancer Types

 
  • Breast
  • Breast (HER2+)
  • Breast (Triple-Negative)
  • CML
  • Colorectal
  • Gastrointestinal
  • GIST
  • Genitourinary
  • Gynecologic
  • Head & Neck
  • Hematology
  • Kidney (Renal Cell)
  • Leukemia
  • Lung
  • Lymphoma
  • Melanoma
  • Multiple Myeloma
  • Ovarian
  • Prostate
  • Sarcoma

Supportive Care

More Topics

  • Bone Metastases
  • End-of-Life Care
  • Palliative Care
  • Ethics in Oncology
  • Practice Management
  • Practice & Policy


All Topics 


 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma
  • Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Who Is Benefiting?
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • A 48-Year-Old Woman With Irregular Vaginal Bleeding
  • Cannabis Linked to Decreased Bladder Cancer Risk
  • Breast Cancer Screening, Risk, and Options for High-Risk Women
  • Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: An Update on Treatment
  • Rising PSA Level in a 46-Year-Old Man
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • Bladder Cancer Recurrence High, Better Follow-Up Care Needed
  • ASCO: Post-Surgery Surveillance Found Safe in Seminoma
  • Fertility Preservation in Women With Breast Cancer: Challenges and Opportunities
  • Addressing Fertility Concerns in Women Diagnosed With Breast Cancer: Will Serial Reserve Screening Help?
  • Postmenopausal Hormone Receptor–Positive Advanced Breast Cancer
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
COMMENTS
  • Most Commented
  • Most Recent
  • 50 Shades of Pink—And Why It Helps to Know the Difference
  • Preventing Exposure to Hazardous Drugs
  • ASCO: Vinegar Screening Significantly Reduces Cervical Cancer Mortality
  • ASCO: Sulforaphane in Prostate Cancer Found Worthy of Further Investigation
  • Study: Recurrent Heartburn Ups Risk for Throat Cancer
  • HER2-Directed Therapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer
  • Accelerated Partial-Breast Irradiation: The Current State of Our Knowledge
  • It’s Time for Clinicians to Reconsider Their Proscription Against the Use of Soyfoods by Breast Cancer Patients
  • 50 Shades of Pink—And Why It Helps to Know the Difference
  • ASCO: No Benefit From Avastin in Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter


 
SearchMedica Search Result

Find peer-reviewed literature and websites for practicing medical professionals

CME on Practice Management
Evidence on Practice Management
Guidelines on Practice Management
Patient Education on Practice Management
Clinical Trials on Practice Management
Practical Articles on Practice Management
Research and Reviews on Practice Management
All "Practice Management" results

CancerNetwork on Facebook

CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy