It is normally that time of year when many of us not only steal candy from the kids’ Halloween collections (my kids never got to keep any Twizzlers they were given), but also continuously watch the Federal Register for the release of the 2026 Outpatient and Physician rules.
And of course, my main concern is what the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has to say about its proposed elimination of the Inpatient-Only List. I do not expect them to back away from it, but I am hoping that they provide more details on what criteria should be used to determine which non-inpatient-only surgery patients can be admitted as inpatients, and what patients can be admitted as inpatients for surgery to gain access to the Part A Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) benefit.
On the other hand, with the many personnel changes at both CMS and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), I am concerned that there will no longer be enough subject-matter experts to address the many nuances. And that will leave us once again at the mercy of the auditors, and more worrisome, the Medicare Advantage (MA) plans, to get status correct.
Moving on, last week Kaiser Health News had an article in their series “Bill of the Month” describing a doctor who was in a car accident and sustained a large open wound on her leg and a complex ankle fracture. The patient was taken by ambulance to a trauma center, was evaluated by the trauma team, underwent three CT scans, and then admitted as an inpatient and taken to the operating room (OR) for lavage and repair of her leg wound and open reduction and internal fixation of her ankle. She was discharged the next day.
And, as you would expect, the insurance company denied the claim, reportedly stating that the patient should have been treated as observation. Now, putting aside the fact that there was no role for observation in this case, I have to agree with the payer that outpatient status was likely correct.
The patient was healthy and did require emergency surgery, but there do not appear to have been any extenuating circumstances that warranted inpatient admission.
Then, from the article, it appears that the patient was billed for the full charge of $64,000 when her insurer denied the claim. What should have happened?
Well, as a one-day inpatient admission, this case should have gone into the utilization review (UR) work queue prior to claim preparation for review to determine if inpatient admission was correct. And as I noted, it likely was not.
At that point, since the patient was already discharged, the hospital could have self-denied the admission and prepared and submitted a rebilled outpatient claim and avoided becoming the subject of a national news article. But instead, the claim was submitted, the patient got a bill, they called the media, and here we are today.
I am sure you don’t want your hospital to be the subject of such media attention, so be sure your short-stay admission status review process is hardwired. Your marketing team will thank you.
Now, there is a good side to his story. With all the reports of hospitals charging outrageous prices for medication for hospitalized patients, an aspirin at this hospital was only $0.09.
I do not suspect Kaiser Health News will be publishing an article titled “Hospital Charges Reasonable Prices for Oral Medications.”
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
