Practical Guidance on Medicare Physician Signature Requirements

I was recently researching the physician signature requirements under the Medicare program and found this resource outlining some of key questions and answers around the requirements.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Medicare Learning Network has issued a fact sheet on Comprehensive Error Rate Testing (CERT) Signature Requirements with the Q and A. Also mentioned in the guidance as a resourceis the Medicare Learning Network's MLN Matters Article MM6698, "Signature Guidelines for Medical Review Purposes."

AMA Issues New Policy To Guide Physicians’ Use of Social Media

Today the American Medical Association announced that it has adopted and issued a new policy offering guidance to physicians on the use of social media. The new policy focuses on helping physicians to "maintain a positive online presence and preserve the integrity of the patient-physician relationship."

The press release indicates that the policy encourages physicians to:

• Use privacy settings to safeguard personal information and content to the fullest extent possible on social networking sites.
• Routinely monitor their own Internet presence to ensure that the personal and professional information on their own sites and content posted about them by others, is accurate and appropriate.
• Maintain appropriate boundaries of the patient-physician relationship when interacting with patients online and ensure patient privacy and confidentiality is maintained.
• Consider separating personal and professional content online.
• Recognize that actions online and content posted can negatively affect their reputations among patients and colleagues, and may even have consequences for their medical careers.

UPDATE (11/10/10): Below is a copy of the complete AMA Policy on Professionalism in the Use of Social Media that Jane Sarasohn-Kahn obtained from Katherine Hatwell, AMA Media Relations.

AMA POLICY: PROFESSIONALISM IN THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA

The Internet has created the ability for medical students and physicians to communicate and share information quickly and to reach millions of people easily. Participating in social networking and other similar Internet opportunities can support physicians’ personal expression, enable individual physicians to have a professional presence online, foster collegiality and camaraderie within the profession, provide opportunity to widely disseminate public health messages and other health communication. Social networks, blogs, and other forms of communication online also create new challenges to the patient-physician relationship. Physicians should weigh a number of considerations when maintaining a presence online:

(a) Physicians should be cognizant of standards of patient privacy and confidentiality that must be maintained in all environments, including online, and must refrain from posting identifiable patient information online.

(b) When using the Internet for social networking, physicians should use privacy settings to safeguard personal information and content to the extent possible, but should realize that privacy settings are not absolute and that once on the Internet, content is likely there permanently. Thus, physicians should routinely monitor their own Internet presence to ensure that the personal and professional information on their own sites and, to the extent possible, content posted about them by others, is accurate and appropriate.

(c) If they interact with patients on the Internet, physicians must maintain appropriate boundaries of the patient-physician relationship in accordance with professional ethical guidelines just, as they would in any other context.

(d) To maintain appropriate professional boundaries physicians should consider separating personal and professional content online.

(e) When physicians see content posted by colleagues that appears unprofessional they have a responsibility to bring that content to the attention of the individual, so that he or she can remove it and/or take other appropriate actions. If the behavior significantly violates professional norms and the individual does not take appropriate action to resolve the situation, the physician should report the matter to appropriate authorities.

(f) Physicians must recognize that actions online and content posted may negatively affect their reputations among patients and colleagues, may have consequences for their medical careers (particularly for physicians-in-training and medical students), and can undermine public trust in the medical profession.

Educating Physicians About Social Media

Great insight and advice from Bryan Vartabedian, M.D., the author of 33 Charts on "How to Speak to Physicians About Social Media."

Dr. V was responding to a request from Susannah Fox, Associate Director - Digital Strategy at Pew Internet & American Life Project, who will be speaking on a panel at the American College of Surgeons 96th Annual Clinical Congress next month. The session title is To Tweet or Become Extinct?: Why Surgeons Need to Understand Social Networking.

As someone who regularly speaks to groups of physicians I enjoy the opportunity every time (as long as I start off by saying I'm a health care defense attorney). As a group they are always engaging and inquisitive which leads to great discussions. As Dr. V points out the legal aspects and concerns over privacy and liability will be a topic not far below the surface. Like lawyers surgeons are trained to be skeptical technicians. I see that there is a lawyer, Rebekah A. Z. Monson, who is on the panel to cover the dos and don'ts. However, I hope you (Susannah) will weave into the legal discussion the consumer health and e-patient issues that often clash with the legal implications. Don't let the legal issues stand alone.

Dr. V's advice of ". . . discussion of patient-specific issues in public forums is off limits; discussion of patient non-specific issues is encouraged. Any attempt at patient-initiated discussion of specific medical issues immediately goes offline and onto the EMR for issues of record, liability and safety . . ." is excellent. I also like Dr. V's ethical dilemma recommendation for a possible case study approach during the discussion. One example you may want to explore using to address the clash between physician as authoritarian (transparency issue that Dr. V discusses) vs. patient as engaged consumer (e-patient) is the story of Johathan Zittrain's crowdsourcing his diagnosis. His story presents many great angles on social media's use in the health care environment by e-patients.

As for the legal implications of social media if you want to bone up on the topic take a look at the article I co-authored for AHLA earlier this year on the legal implications of health care social media, Risky Business: Treating Tweeting the Symptoms of Social Media.

Good luck Susannah and break a leg (no worries - there will be plenty of docs around to take care of you)!

WVHCA: Proposed Amendment to West Virginia CON Law Defintion of "Private Office Practice"

On June 15, 2010, the West Virginia Health Care Authority filed a Notice of a Comment Period on a Proposed Rule with the West Virginia Secretary of State amending West Virginia CSR 65-7, Certificate of Need Rule.

According to the Summary and Statement of Circumstances filed with the Proposed Rule the "amendment clarifies the definition of "private office practice" for purposes of administering the Certificate of Need Program. Those entities meeting this criteria may be eligible for an exemption from Certificate of Need review pursuant to West Virginia Code 16-2D-R(a)."

Written comments on the Proposed Rule are due on or before July 16, 2010.

WVBOM: Policy Statement - Guidelines for Physicians in Collaborative Relationships with Advanced Nurse Practitioners

On May 10, 2010, the West Virginia Board of Medicine has issued a new Policy Statement - Guidelines for Physicians in Collaborative Relationships with Advanced Nurse Practitioners or Certified Nurse Midwives; Standard of Practice.

The new Policy Statement provide West Virginia physicians with guidance on the role and responsibility they play in the collaborative relationship with advanced nurse practitioners and certified nurse-midwifes. In summary, the guidance provides:

A. The physician must be permanently and fully licensed in West Virginia without restriction or limitation.

B. There should be a written collaborative agreement should should include certain specific provisions as outlined in the Policy Statement.

C. Other considerations that are outlined in the Policy Statement

The Policy Statement indicates that the failure by a physician to adhere to these minimum requirements and guidelines may result in discipline by the Board of Medicine.

Credentialing and Privileging Telemedicine Physician and Practitioner

Last week the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a proposed rule revising the conditions of participation (CoPs) for hospitals and critical access hospitals allowing for a new credentialing and privileging process for physicians and practitioners who provide telemedicine services. The proposed rule should make it easier on smaller hospital (especially critical access hospitals) who don't have the in-house medical staff to adequately evaluate and privilege a wide range of specialty physicians who provide services through telemedicine.

The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on May 26, 2010, and titled, Credentialing and Privileging of Telemedicine Physicians and Practitioners, 75 Fed Reg 29479 (May 26, 2010). Comments on the proposed rule must be submitted by July 26, 2010.

Traditionally the CoPs have required the governing body of the hospital to make all privileging decisions based on the recommendations of its medical staff using specific criteria. Hospitals often use third-party credentialing verification services to assist in compiling the voluminous documents needed to verify credentialing and then have the governing body of the hospital review and sign off on the privileging decision.

The proposed rule points out that there has been a Joint Commission standard policy that allows "privileging by proxy," which has been in direct conflict with CoPs. "Privileging by proxy" allows Joint Commission accredited hospitals to utilize a different methodology to privilege"distant-site" physicians and practitioners. Basically, allowing one Joint Commissioned accredited hospital to accept the privileging decisions of another Joint Commissioned accredited hospital. In the past, hospitals were deemed (deemed status) to meet the CoPs if they were accredited by the Joint Commission. However, changes in the Medicare Improvement for Patients and Providers Act of 2008 (MIPPA) will halt (effective July 15, 2010) the statutory recognition of the Joint Commission's hospital accreditation program and now requires the Joint Commission to meet CMS standards in order to confer Medicare deemed status.

CMS has decided that requiring each hospital to independently privilege providers is a duplicative and burdensome process, especially for small hospitals who often use telemedicine services from larger academic medical centers and hospitals to provide access to needed specialty services. Thus, CMS is proposing in the rule to revise the hospital credentialing and privileging requirements to allow a hospital who obtains telemedicine services by agreement with another hospital that the agreement can specify that the hospital providing the telemedicine services is responsible for credentialing the telemedicine provider and can provide this information to the medical staff of the hospital receiving the telemedicine services who can then rely upon the credentialing and privileging decisions of the hospital providing the telemedicine services.

For a more detailed discussion and understanding of the proposed revisions read the proposed rule in the May 26, 2010, Federal Register.

2010 AHLA Hospitals and Health Systems Law Institute: Hot 2010 Health Law Legal Topics

Although it is cold today in West Virginia - I'm hoping it will be hot in Florida in February.

I thought I would take a moment on this cold wintry day to write about the hot health topics that will be discussed at the American Health Lawyers Association (AHLA) Hospitals and Health Systems Law Institute scheduled for February 25-26, 2010 at the Doral Golf Resort & Spa in Miami, Florida (Conference Brochure PDF).

I will be speaking at the Hospitals Law Institute along with my colleague, Jody Joiner, Assistant Operations Counsel at Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth Health System. Our topic scheduled for Friday, February 26 is Hospital’s Friend or Foe: The Age of Social Media and Health 2.0 where we plan to cover:

• The social media technology tools used by health care providers and hospitals
• Pros/cons and legal implications of social media and health 2.0 services such as blogs, wikis, social networking, podcasting, video sharing, etc.
• Best practices and development of policies and procedures which address staff and employees using social media

In addition to our session there will be variety of "hot" health law legal topic covered at the conference that will interest hospital administrators and their legal counsel, including sessions on government data mining to identify hospital compliance, understanding the recent ARRA HITECH developments impacting HIPAA and EHR, hospital/physician collaboration and relationships, best practices in hospital practitioner credentialing, peer review and privileging, voluntary disclosure strategies, hospital clinical research issues, and much more.

The AHLA Hospital and Health System Law Institute overlaps with the AHLA Physicians and Physician Organizations Law Insitute which will be held on February 24-25.The Physician Law Insitute will include "hot" physician topics on on call payments, Accountability Care Organizations, HITECH, disruptive physician behavior intervention, Stark issues for physicians, hospital/physician mergers, FMV for physician compensation and much more.

You can register for one or both. As an AHLA Member I regularly attend the Physician/Hospital Law Institutes every year or so because of quality and breadth of health law related materials for those who work in the health care industry. More information, along with how to register, can be found at the AHLA website:
Hospitals and Health Systems Law Institute
Physicians and Physician Organizations Law Insitute

A 1930 Medical Record

I was recently in my hometown of New Martinsville visiting my dad, a retired family physician. When I arrived he had waiting for me a copy of one of my grandfather's medical records from the 1930s. My grandfather, Dr. Albert Coffield, practiced rural medicine in Wetzel County, West Virginia from 1911 until his death in 1936.

My dad told me the following story about the medical record.

My dad was a doctor who practiced out of his house on Coffield Ridge in Wetzel County. After my dad died in 1936 our mother sold the household furnishing and his office equipment. I was 12 years old when he died and my older brother was a first year student at West Virginia University. Since my mother wasn't employed she decided to move us to Morgantown where the University was so that my older brother could continue his college education. As a way to continue the family income she rented rooms to college students - many who came to the University from Wetzel County.

Included in the sale of the household and office furnishing was a wooden credenza with metal alphabetized slides. Behind some of the slides were some old medical records that were left in the credenza.

Thirty years later a lady who was a patient of mine brought the wooden credenza to me and told me that she had bought the credenza at the auction of my family's household items in 1936. She told me that she thought I would appreciate having it.

Here are photos of the medical record of a patient from 1934. The medical record format is simple yet complete. It contains all the important demographic and clinical information - including the patient statement, habits, family history, past history, physician examination and diagnosis. On the back is additional space for notes and a drawing of the internal organs that I suspect was meant to be used with the patient for education and instruction. It even has a built in billing record section that even the change:healthcare crowd would love.

What can these photos tell us about the current health care reform debate. Compare these photos of a medical record from 1934 to those that cost .73 cents today. Could today's physician and his or her patient get "meaningful use" out of this record?

A close up of the billing section for the change:healthcare gang.