Don’t Exaggerate to Encourage Compliance

Don’t keep your doctor in the dark.

It can be tempting to exaggerate the risk of practice as a means to encourage compliance. But it is unwise. I don’t think I can count the number of times that over my career someone has said “Whatever you do, don’t tell my doctors” after hearing me describe how certain practices can be defended. In one recent example, we were discussing an organization’s policy of having physicians re-document portions of a note. The compliance person asked if the practice was required and I emphasized that it was not. Fearing the physicians would disregard the policy if they knew my opinion, the compliance person hoped I would keep it on the down low. While I understand that it can be unpleasant to argue with a physician about a compliance policy. Obfuscating the truth to avoid that challenge is a terrible idea.

I understand that in most organizations physicians have considerable power. They bring money into the system and they’re an essential part of healthcare delivery. It’s reasonable that they have power. Of course, that doesn’t mean that they should, or do, have unfettered power. Most organizations recognize the need to stay within the bounds of the law even if it frustrates the physicians. And I would add most physicians, even the argumentative ones, want to stay within the bounds of the law. They are simply trying to ascertain the lowest level of work they can perform while being compliant. And there’s nothing wrong with that. All of us should be trying to do as little work as possible to maximize the time you can spend doing something you enjoy like reading or storm chasing. Don’t begrudge a physician for trying to find the perfect balance of compliance and effort. 

While it might feel like keeping the doctor in the dark might give you an advantage in a debate, I would posit that the opposite is true. If a physician chooses to dispute a position taken by compliance, it’s likely some administrative person will need to choose sides. To win the argument in front of the decision-maker you will have to be persuasive. If you stake out a position that’s inconsistent with the law, and the physician can find an expert who demonstrates the fallacy of your position, your credibility is toast. By contrast, if you candidly explain: “The law would indeed allow this particular practice, but if we do it, there’s a very high likelihood we will be audited. During that audit, it’s likely you will lose at the first level. You would be able to obtain a good lawyer who could win the appeal but you will have to pay them. Even though we could choose to do it that way, I recommend we don’t.” The odds of winning the fight are much, much higher than if the physician can demonstrate that you have overstated the law to try to advance the position. That argument also might persuade the physician. 

There’s a second reason to take the honest approach. Arsonists can set fire to straw men. When you tell everyone that a particular practice is illegal, you’re inviting a whistleblower to challenge it. When a whistleblower can go to the government and say “My organization says this practice is illegal but they are doing it anyway,” You have waved the metaphorical red flag in front of the metaphorical bull. In the eyes of many regulators, violating an internal policy is akin to violating the law. When you establish a policy that’s more restrictive than the law, do so overtly, explaining to everyone involved that you’re choosing the cautious approach. When it comes to compliance, candor, and clarity, are superior to hyperbole and hysteria.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

David M. Glaser, Esq.

David M. Glaser is a shareholder in Fredrikson & Byron's Health Law Group. David assists clinics, hospitals, and other health care entities negotiate the maze of healthcare regulations, providing advice about risk management, reimbursement, and business planning issues. He has considerable experience in healthcare regulation and litigation, including compliance, criminal and civil fraud investigations, and reimbursement disputes. David's goal is to explain the government's enforcement position, and to analyze whether this position is supported by the law or represents government overreaching. David is a member of the RACmonitor editorial board and is a popular guest on Monitor Mondays.

Related Stories

Leave a Reply

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

Featured Webcasts

2026 IPPS Masterclass 3: Master MS-DRG Shifts and NTAPs

2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 3: MS-DRG Shifts and NTAPs

This third session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature a review of FY26 changes to the MS-DRG methodology and new technology add-on payments (NTAPs), presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.

August 14, 2025
2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 2: Master ICD-10-PCS Changes

2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 2: Master ICD-10-PCS Changes

This second session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature a review the FY26 changes to ICD-10-PCS codes. This information will be presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.

August 13, 2025
2026 IPPS Masterclass 1: Master ICD-10-CM Changes

2026 IPPS Masterclass Day 1: Master ICD-10-CM Changes

This first session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature an in-depth explanation of FY26 changes to ICD-10-CM codes and guidelines, CCs/MCCs, and revisions to the MCE, presented by presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.

August 12, 2025

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

The Two-Midnight Rule: New Challenges, Proven Strategies

The Two-Midnight Rule: New Challenges, Proven Strategies

RACmonitor is proud to welcome back Dr. Ronald Hirsch, one of his most requested webcasts. In this highly anticipated session, Dr. Hirsch will break down the complex Two Midnight Rule Medicare regulations, translating them into clear, actionable guidance. He’ll walk you through the basics of the rule, offer expert interpretation, and apply the rule to real-world clinical scenarios—so you leave with greater clarity, confidence, and the tools to ensure compliance.

June 19, 2025
Open Door Forum Webcast Series

Open Door Forum Webcast Series

Bring your questions and join the conversation during this open forum series, live every Wednesday at 10 a.m. EST from June 11–July 30. Hosted by Chuck Buck, these fast-paced 30-minute sessions connect you directly with top healthcare experts tackling today’s most urgent compliance and policy issues.

June 11, 2025
Open Door Forum: The Changing Face of Addiction: Coding, Compliance & Care

Open Door Forum: The Changing Face of Addiction: Coding, Compliance & Care

Substance abuse is everywhere. It’s a complicated diagnosis with wide-ranging implications well beyond acute care. The face of addiction continues to change so it’s important to remember not just the addict but the spectrum of extended victims and the other social determinants and legal ramifications. Join John K. Hall, MD, JD, MBA, FCLM, FRCPC, for a critical Q&A on navigating substance abuse in 2025.  Register today and be a part of the conversation!

July 16, 2025

Trending News

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. 2 with code CYBER24