CMS Proposal to Reduce Documentation Requirements

CMS proposes to ease burdens on providers.

When it comes to the ever-changing Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) agency rules and regulations, one can’t help but be reminded of the classic tune by The Byrds: “to everything (turn, turn, turn), there is a season (turn, turn, turn).”

The last several decades have been fraught with increasing documentation requirements. Yet recently we saw the CMS proposal to eliminate documentation requirements for providers in office evaluation and management (E&M) documentation, as the agency continues its proposal trend with the latest rendering of less being more.

On Sept. 17, CMS sent out a proposed rule under the catchy title “CMS Proposes to Lift Unnecessary Regulations and Ease Burden on Providers.” According to CMS, this new proposed rule will save $1.12 billion per year, cut “red tape,” and reduce “burdensome regulations,” as requested of the agency by Donald Trump, the 45th and current President. This proposal may be found online at https://downloads.cms.gov/files/MedicareBurdenReductionfinal.pdf

According to CMS, “this proposed rule would increase the ability of healthcare professionals to devote resources to improving patient care by eliminating or reducing requirements that impede quality patient care or that divert resources away from furnishing high-quality patient care.”

The proposal includes three categories: 1) Proposals that simplify and streamline processes; 2) proposals that reduce the frequency of activities and revise timelines; and 3) proposals that are obsolete, duplicative, or that contain unnecessary requirements.

The proposals that may impact providers can be found in 1) Proposals that simplify and streamline processes:

1.c. ASC Requirements for Comprehensive Medical History and Physical Assessment, which indicates that the Ambulatory Service Center (ASC) policy and operating physician’s clinical judgment should be utilized to ensure that patients receive appropriate pre-surgical assessments that are tailored to each case and the type of surgery being performed. The new requirement would be that the operating physician must document any preexisting medical conditions, appropriate test results, and any allergies to drugs and biologicals, eliminating the requirement for a full medical history and physical examination (H&P).
 
1.g. Hospital Requirements for Comprehensive Medical History and Physical Examinations: This proposal would defer to facilities to establish a medical staff policy describing the circumstances under which they could utilize a pre-surgery/pre-procedure assessment for an outpatient, instead of a comprehensive H&P. Per the proposal: the hospital’s policy would need to take into consideration patient age, diagnoses, the type and number of surgeries and procedures scheduled to be performed, comorbidities, and the level of anesthesia required for the surgeries or procedures. The policy would also need to incorporate nationally recognized guidelines and standards of practice in order to assess specific types of patients prior to specific outpatient surgeries and procedures.
 
1.n. Personnel Requirements for Portable X-Ray Technologists: This proposal would eliminate the requirements for signed orders for portable X-ray services.
 
3. Proposals That Are Obsolete, Duplicative, or That Contain Unnecessary Requirements: 3.1 removes the requirement for hospitals to secure autopsies in all cases of unusual deaths and defers to state law requirements.
Although not directly impacting providers, and in keeping with the theme of disaster preparedness that has been common in this country in recent years, the 2) proposals that reduce the frequency of activities and revise timelines include:
 
2.p. Emergency Preparedness Requirements: Requirements for Emergency Plans, which would eliminate the need for facilities to document efforts to contact local, tribal, regional, state, and federal emergency preparedness officials. Additional proposals that bear mention include 2.g. Emergency Preparedness Requirements: Requirements for Annual Review of Emergency Program., 2.h. Emergency Preparedness Requirements: Requirements for Training and 2.i. Emergency Preparedness Requirements: Requirements for Testing. These emergency preparedness requirements necessitate perusal by facilities.
 

There are many other proposals that are part of this document that address Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs), community mental health, and hospice, as well as transplant programs and home health.

If you are one of the lucky ones who has been in this business as long as I have, the saying “what goes around, comes around” can be appropriately applied to healthcare here.

To read the proposal in its entirety, go online to the Federal Register: https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2018-19599.pdf

Comments may be submitted electronically through e-Regulation website here: https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Regulations-and-Policies/eRulemaking/index.html?redirect=/eRulemaking.

Comment on this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Denise Nash, MD, CCS, CIM

Denise Nash, MD has more than 20 years of experience in the healthcare industry. In her last position, she served as senior vice president of compliance and education for MiraMed Global Services, and as such she handled all compliance and education needs, including working with external clients. Dr. Nash has worked for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) in hospital auditing and has expertise in negotiation and implementation of risk contracting for managed care plans. She has also worked with individuals as well as physician groups on utilization and Physician Quality Reporting System (PQRS) management to improve financial performance for risk-based contracts and value-based purchasing programs. Dr. Nash has past experience with episode-of-care data, hierarchical condition categories (HCCs), and patient management in the Accountable Care Organization (ACO) environment. She has also worked with both hospitals and physician practices on the legal and financial aspects of adding new services to their respective facilities. Dr. Nash is a consultant on coding/compliance audits at physician practices and hospitals, and has worked for insurance plans conducting second- and third-level appeals. Her past experience also included consulting for the Office of the Inspector General of New Hampshire in its Fraud and Abuse Division.

Related Stories

Leave a Reply

Please log in to your account to comment on this article.

Featured Webcasts

Mastering Principal Diagnosis: Coding Precision, Medical Necessity, and Quality Impact

Mastering Principal Diagnosis: Coding Precision, Medical Necessity, and Quality Impact

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.

December 3, 2025

Proactive Denial Management: Data-Driven Strategies to Prevent Revenue Loss

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.

November 25, 2025
Sepsis: Bridging the Clinical Documentation and Coding Gap to Reduce Denials

Sepsis: Bridging the Clinical Documentation and Coding Gap to Reduce Denials

Sepsis remains one of the most frequently denied and contested diagnoses, creating costly revenue loss and compliance risks. In this webcast, Angela Comfort, DBA, MBA, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, provides practical, real-world strategies to align documentation with coding guidelines, reconcile Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 definitions, and apply compliant queries. You’ll learn how to identify and address documentation gaps, strengthen provider engagement, and defend diagnoses against payer scrutiny—equipping you to protect reimbursement, improve SOI/ROM capture, and reduce audit vulnerability in this high-risk area.

September 24, 2025

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue

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.

January 29, 2026

AI in Claims Auditing: Turning Compliance Risks into Defensible Systems

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.

January 13, 2026
Surviving Federal Audits for Inpatient Rehab Facility Services

Surviving Federal Audits for Inpatient Rehab Facility Services

Federal auditors are zeroing in on Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility (IRF) and hospital rehab unit services, with OIG and CERT audits leading to millions in penalties—often due to documentation and administrative errors, not quality of care. Join compliance expert Michael Calahan, PA, MBA, to learn the five clinical “pillars” of IRF-PPS admissions, key documentation requirements, and real-life case lessons to help protect your revenue.

November 13, 2025

Trending News

Prepare for the 2025 CMS IPPS Final Rule with ICD10monitor’s IPPSPalooza! Click HERE to learn more

Get 15% OFF on all educational webcasts at ICD10monitor with code JULYFOURTH24 until July 4, 2024—start learning today!

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