search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
value of the preventive health service itself or the future health care costs reasonably expected to be avoided as a result of the preventive care.


Other types of health screenings and other patient assistance programs may fall within the protection afforded by two of the new beneficiary inducement prohibition exceptions that were added by the ACA and implemented in final regulations that became effective on Jan. 6, 2017.


One exception that may prove useful protects “remuneration that promotes access to care and poses a low risk of harm.” Under this exception, an arrangement “promotes access to care” only if it “improves a particular beneficiary’s ability to obtain” care by, for example, removing barriers to access (but not rewarding a patient for obtaining care or rewarding patient adherence). Remuneration “poses a low risk of harm” if the items or services are unlikely to interfere with, or skew, clinical decision-making; are unlikely to increase costs to federal health care programs or beneficiaries


through overutilization or inappropriate utilization; and do not raise patient safety or quality of care concerns.


Another new and potentially useful exception to the beneficiary inducement prohibition is available for certain items and services provided to those in “financial need” (which must be determined on the basis of external evidence on an individualized basis but is otherwise undefined). To be eligible for this exception, there must be a “reasonable connection” between the items and services provided to the patient and his or her medical care; the arrangement may not be advertised; and the offer or transfer may not be tied to the provision of Medicare or Medicaid-covered services.


Conclusion Such exceptions require providers (and their attorneys) to make fine distinctions that are not necessarily intuitive. For example, what about providing free educational materials to patients or prospective patients? Can notepads, tote bags and similar items be provided


at an educational program? What if the event is a health fair that provides a Medicare-covered preventive health screening? Can patients be provided free parking? Under what conditions? Automobile child seats? Strollers? Health care apps? Coupons to purchase health care apps? If you want to provide free lodging and transportation to patients who have a financial hardship while they are receiving care, which exceptions might apply to what?


The distinctions are not intuitive or easy for providers—or for their attorneys. That’s the bad news. The good news is that those distinctions may be equally difficult for government regulators seeking to impose penalties for beneficiary inducement. In every case, then, adequate care must be taken to ensure that the patient-centered care you provide avoids the potential legal risks associated with it.


Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice or a substitute for specific legal counseling.


SEPT. 27–29, 2018 WESTIN MICHIGAN AVENUE CHICAGO


It’s time to change the way you manage patients with venous thromboembolism. ACTiVE offers multidisciplinary education on VTE care that improves patient outcomes.


Hear what faculty have to say about their sessions:


Between the imminent completion of the FDA-sponsored PRESERVE IVC filter trial, the initiation of the landmark NIH-sponsored C-TRACT chronic DVT trial, and the completion and progression of several new pulmonary embolism device trials, there could not be a more exciting time to hear what’s new in interventional VTE therapies. This year’s ACTiVE is a can’t-miss event, with experts on IVC filters, acute DVT treatment, chronic DVT recanalization, and pulmonary embolism debating current strategies and looking toward the future.—Akhilesh K. Sista, MD, FSIR, NYU-Langone School of Medicine, New York


Register today at bit.ly/active18


Learn more: sirweb.org/active Questions? Email us at education@sirweb.org.


sirweb.org/irq | 23


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40