Weave Compliance Into Your Practice For 2021

fhlf regulatory compliance

fhlf regulatory complianceBy: Jeff Cohen

A recent Department of Justice $500,000 settlement with a cardiology practice underscores the need for ensuring tighter compliance by medical practices.  There, the practice billed Medicare for cardiology procedures for which interpretive reports were also required.  Medicare paid for the procedures, but upon audit, CMS could not find the requisite interpretive reports.  The False Claims Act case settled for $500,000, but it’s likely that (1) the reimbursement by Medicare was far less, and (b) the legal fees behind the settlement weren’t too far behind the settlement amount!  Had the practice self-audited each year, would they have found the discrepancy?

Medical practices have felt the weight of price compression and regulatory load more than probably any segment in the healthcare sector.  They are doing far more for far less.  And regulations expand faster than viruses!  Hence, many have a strategy of regulatory compliance that can best be characterized as a combination of facial compliance (“We bought the manual and put it on the shelf”) and hope (“They’re not really serious about this, are they?”).  Unless you’re part of a practice of more than 20 doctors, it’s likely that you can do more to ensure regulatory compliance.

Continue reading

Florida Now Requires Written Consent for All Pelvic Exams

By: David Davidson

As of July 1, 2020, all Florida health care providers, and providers in training, are now required to obtain written consent from their patients (or their legal representatives) before performing a pelvic exam.  The only exceptions to this requirement are when the exam is done pursuant to a court order, or in cases of emergency.  Given the broad application of the new law, it is imperative for any provider who may need to perform a pelvic exam on a patient, even if it’s a fairly rare occurrence, to be ready to obtain the consent.

The law grew out of concerns for improper actions taken against sedated patients.  And as initially proposed, it only covered pelvic exams performed in training settings.  However, the legislature expanded the scope to include all settings and all providers.Continue reading