We all know now that the federal telehealth waivers were allowed to expire while Congress continues the stalemate over the budget. And in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) bulletin released at the start of the shutdown, the agency suggested that providers could offer Advance Beneficiary Notices (ABNs) to Medicare patients who are willing to pay to proceed with a telehealth visit.
The providers could get the patient’s verbal agreement, email or mail the ABN for the patient to sign and send back, and then the provider could hold the claim until the new budget passes – and hope that telehealth coverage is retroactive to Oct. 1. If so, they could submit the claim and get paid by Medicare, and if the coverage is not extended, they could bill the patient directly.
But here is the problem with that. The Medicare Manual has two requirements that may be hard to meet. First is that the ABN must be “provided far enough in advance of delivering potentially non-covered items or services to allow sufficient time for the beneficiary to consider all available options,” and second is that the ABN must be “explained in its entirety, and all of the beneficiary’s related questions are answered timely, accurately, and completely to the best of the notifier’s ability.”
It would not be enough to say to a patient on the phone or other technology that the visit may not be covered, ask if they want to proceed and pay for it themselves, and then send the form. When they get the bill from the doctor for the visit, the patient could claim they did not have adequate time, and agreed to proceed without even having the form to review. And I suggest that both those arguments would be enough for their appeal to be successful and free the patient of liability. Now, the telehealth provider could have staff call the patient in advance of the visit to explain the ABN, provide options, and answer questions; that would work with scheduled visits, but might be difficult to operationalize with urgent visits.
Moving on to another topic, two weeks ago the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) released a report on billing of trauma activation by hospitals. It is interesting that this issue was added to the Work Plan in November 2022, the charts that were audited were from January 2020 to June 2022, the OIG paid an outside auditor to analyze the cases, and there was no report until September 2025. Three years to audit 125 claims; where can I sign up to be an OIG auditor?
So, as often happens, the OIG reported a very high error rate, finding that 77 percent of claims were improper and estimating that during those 2½ years, CMS overpaid $2.4 billion in unallowed charges. And if I extrapolate that number, it means that since June 2022, another $3.3 billion in improper payments has been paid out while the OIG and its contractor took their time producing his report.
But the real fun was reading the response from CMS. CMS totally discounted the OIG’s findings, noting that the OIG did not use the right criteria to determine if trauma activation was billed correctly, but not noting which criteria they used were wrong or what criteria they should have used.
The OIG also pointed out that CMS’s most recent education on this topic was from 2007, and recommended CMS provide more frequent education, to which CMS noted that they will assess the need for additional education. I suspect something has changed in 18 years, and if not, a refresher after that long certainly cannot hurt.
But the message here is that if you are a trauma center, review your coding of trauma activation and be sure it follows the rules, whatever they may be.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) operates a surveillance platform called the Fraud Prevention System (FPS) that analyzes Medicare claims across the full
EDITOR’S NOTE: Artificial intelligence was utilized for structural refinement and grammatical editing. All analyses, interpretations, and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
Sepsis sequencing continues to challenge even experienced coding and CDI professionals, with evolving guidelines, documentation gaps, and payer scrutiny driving denials and data inconsistencies. In this webcast, Payal Sinha, MBA, RHIA, CCDS, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, CCDS-O, CRC, CRCR, provides clear guideline-based strategies to accurately code sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock, assign POA indicators, clarify the relationship between infection and organ dysfunction, and align documentation across teams. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen audit defensibility, improve first-pass accuracy, support appeal success, reduce denials, and ensure accurate quality reporting, empowering organizations to achieve consistent, compliant sepsis coding outcomes.
Expert presenters Kathy Pride, RHIT, CPC, CCS-P, CPMA, and Brandi Russell, RHIA, CCS, COC, CPMA, break down complex fracture care coding rules, walk through correct modifier application (-25, -57, 54, 55), and clarify sequencing for initial and subsequent encounters. Attendees will gain the practical knowledge needed to submit clean claims, ensure compliance, and stay one step ahead of payer audits in 2026.
Accurately determining the principal diagnosis is critical for compliant billing, appropriate reimbursement, and valid quality reporting — yet it remains one of the most subjective and error-prone areas in inpatient coding. In this expert-led session, Cheryl Ericson, RN, MS, CCDS, CDIP, demystifies the complexities of principal diagnosis assignment, bridging the gap between coding rules and clinical reality. Learn how to strengthen your organization’s coding accuracy, reduce denials, and ensure your documentation supports true medical necessity.
Denials continue to delay reimbursement, increase administrative burden, and threaten financial stability across healthcare organizations. This essential webcast tackles the root causes—rising payer scrutiny, fragmented workflows, inconsistent documentation, and underused analytics—and offers proven, data-driven strategies to prevent and overturn denials. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen documentation and coding accuracy, engage clinicians effectively, and leverage predictive analytics and AI to identify risks before they impact revenue. Through real-world case examples and actionable guidance, this session empowers coding, CDI, and revenue cycle professionals to shift from reactive appeals to proactive denial prevention and revenue protection.
In this timely session, Stacey Shillito, CDIP, CPMA, CCS, CCS-P, CPEDC, COPC, breaks down the complexities of Medical Decision Making (MDM) documentation so providers can confidently capture the true complexity of their care. Attendees will learn practical, efficient strategies to ensure documentation aligns with current E/M guidelines, supports accurate coding, and reduces audit risk, all without adding to charting time.
Join Ronald Hirsch, MD, FACP, CHCQM for The PEPPER Returns – Risk and Opportunity at Your Fingertips, a practical webcast that demystifies the PEPPER and shows you how to turn complex claims data into actionable insights. Dr. Hirsch will explain how to interpret key measures, identify compliance risks, uncover missed revenue opportunities, and understand new updates in the PEPPER, all to help your organization stay ahead of audits and use this powerful data proactively.
Stay ahead of the 2026-2027 audit surge with “Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue,” a high-impact webcast led by Michael Calahan, PA, MBA. This concise session gives hospitals and physicians clear insight into the most likely federal audit targets, such as E/M services, split/shared and critical care, observation and admissions, device credits, and Two-Midnight Rule changes, and shows how to tighten documentation, coding, and internal processes to reduce denials, recoupments, and penalties. Attendees walk away with practical best practices to protect revenue, strengthen compliance, and better prepare their teams for inevitable audits.
As AI reshapes healthcare compliance, the risk of biased outputs and opaque decision-making grows. This webcast, led by Frank Cohen, delivers a practical Four-Pillar Governance Framework—Transparency, Accountability, Fairness, and Explainability—to help you govern AI-driven claim auditing with confidence. Learn how to identify and mitigate bias, implement robust human oversight, and document defensible AI review processes that regulators and auditors will accept. Discover concrete remedies, from rotation protocols to uncertainty scoring, and actionable steps to evaluate vendors before contracts are signed. In a regulatory landscape that moves faster than ever, gain the tools to stay compliant, defend your processes, and reduce liability while maintaining operational effectiveness.
Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Decoding Social Admissions’ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 1 with code CYBER25
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24
