Tuesday, 19 February 2008

fraud in mddc arena



Fraud in the MD/DC Arena

Dynamic Chiropractic

Feb 26, 2004

Fraud in the MD/DC Arena

by Jaffe, Richard

In the past five years, there have been numerous criminal prosecutions

of MD/DC clinics. Most of those indicted or investigated have pled

guilty, in part because the possible jail sentences are substantial -

upwards of 10 years. Chiropractic clinic owners have usually received

sentences in the three-to-five-year range, although a few have

received lesser or greater sentences, depending on how much money was

involved in the fraud.

Associate chiropractors who have pled out have received anywhere from

probation to two years. And every once in a while, an investigation

results in no criminal charges being filed. There is every reason to

believe that these investigations will continue, in part, perhaps,

because as recently as 2003, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG)

listed chiropractic among its top 10 areas of investigation.

Does this mean the MD/DC model is fraudulent? Of course not. However,

many MD/DC clinics are abusing the model and defrauding insurance

companies. The scary part is that sometimes the clinic owners don't

even know they are operating illegally. In fact, some may be certain

they are operating legally, because a chiropractic consultant has set

up the clinic, provides ongoing consulting services, and has cleared

the fundamentals of the operation through his or her "legal

department."

As part of a major criminal trial last year, I had an opportunity to

review the materials of many MD/DC clinics and consultants. My basic

conclusion is that there is not much difference between what is being

offered. These systems are not necessarily fraudulent. However, the

systems are extremely complicated, and are based on some questionable

heath care distinctions. The business realities of a busy health care

practice often force these clinics to cut corners to save money and

increase revenues, any and all of which can result in fraud-related

problems. Here are a few areas of concern, and some specific examples.

The MD/DC Structure

In virtually every state, a chiropractor is either completely

prohibited or limited to a minority ownership interest in a

professional corporation/medical clinic. This ownership restriction

has been circumvented by creating two or more corporate entities: a

professional medical corporation owned by the MD, and a management

corporation owned by the DC. The MD is paid a salary, even though he

or she is the sole owner of the professional corporation, and most of

the medical corporation's income is withdrawn by the management

corporation as various types of fees.

To protect the DC from an MD who may want to take the clinic's

business, some consultants and attorneys have recommended that there

be two medical doctors. One MD is the clinic "owner," but does not

actually work in the clinic. In fact, under some plans, the "owner"

never sets foot in the clinic, and may not even meet the chiropractor.

The other doctor is the working MD - the one who works at the clinic

and does whatever the MD is supposed to do at the clinic.

Several years ago, a large insurance company filed civil fraud actions

against several MD/DC clinics in New Jersey. One of the main

allegations was that the MD "owner" lived in another state, had no

contact with the clinic and was the "owner" of approximately 50 other

clinics. The complaint argued that the MD was just renting her name

for a small fee. Is any of this illegal in itself? Probably not.

However, when these cases come to trial, the jury will probably look

none too favorably on this rather obvious attempt to circumvent the

restrictions prohibiting chiropractors from owning medical

professional corporations. So, if this is what you are doing, it might

be time to change.

Diagnostic Testing

What generates the most scrutiny among insurance companies and

government regulators is the testing performed at some MD/DC clinics,

and in particular, the various electrodiagnostic devices used by these

clinics. In most cases, the diagnostic equipment is sold to the

clinics by chiropractic consultants. Is that illegal? Absolutely not!1

Nonetheless, clinics often buy expensive equipment on the advice of

consultants, who claim the clinic can make tons of money from the use

of such equipment. That's because reimbursement for diagnostic testing

far exceeds the fees for chiropractic manipulation, and even for

therapies and modalities a patient would normally receive during a

visit.

However, the high reimbursement rates for diagnostic testing have led

to considerable abuse in the field, in the form of medically

unnecessary testing. Historically, this was only a problem between

practitioners and insurance companies. However, under the federal

HIPAA laws, providing medically unnecessary testing to a patient

insured by any health insurance company is a federal crime. Most

federal prosecution involving MD/DC clinics have involved allegations

about medically unnecessary testing.

In this space, it's impossible to provide an extensive discussion of

what constitutes "unnecessary testing," but here are some basic

points. First, it is probably always medically unnecessary to give a

test after a prior test has come back negative, unless there has been

significant worsening of the condition and the patient is now a

potential candidate for a condition that the test will identify.

second, many clinics have different testing regimes for insurance

patients and cash patients. Cash patients do not get testing other

than X-rays. Is that illegal? Probably not in and of itself, but it is

certainly going to be viewed as suspicious if only insurance patients

get these expensive tests for normal chiropractic injuries and

conditions.

To refine the point, are all insurance patients getting the test? Many

of these electrodiagnostic testing and imaging devices have their

place - in certain cases. However, a reasonable question can be asked

as to whether all patients who present with some kind of back pain

require diagnostic testing, especially when the etiologies of their

conditions are known and well-understood; for example, a pulled muscle

resulting from an identifiable cause or event. I know there are

chiropractors, and especially chiropractic consultants who sell

equipment, who say using this expensive testing will rule out certain

neurological problems. However, if there are no initial indications of

neuropathy, radiating pain, or some other indication that a patient

has anything more then a pulled muscle, I think clinic owners should

think hard about having a protocol that includes a variety and series

of expensive testing for a patient who presents with these relatively

straightforward symptoms.

Billing Under the Physician's Provider Number

It seems obvious, but it's not often publicly acknowledged that the

primary reason for a chiropractor to own or be involved in an MD/DC

clinic is that insurance reimbursement is better for medical doctors

than chiropractors. Insurance companies often limit chiropractic care

and usually prohibit reimbursement for diagnostic testing other than

X-rays, if such tests are ordered by a chiropractor. There are few

such limitations on spinal care or testing when ordered by medical

doctors. It is not surprising, therefore, that most chiropractic

consultants teach that all services provided by ancillary health

personnel in an MD/DC clinic be billed under the medical doctor's name

and provider number, in order to obtain maximum reimbursement.2 Is

this illegal? The answer to this question is quite complicated. The

short version is that it's not necessarily illegal, but in the real

world, most of the clinics are on the wrong side of the legality line.

Here are the basics: In general, medical services rendered by others

can be billed under a physician's name under what Medicare calls the

"incident to rule." Under this rule, services by others which are

integral though an incidental part of the physician's service in the

course of the diagnosis or treatment of a patient, can be billed by

the physician so long as they are commonly furnished or included in

the physician bill; are of the type that are usually furnished in the

physician's office or clinic; and are medically appropriate.

However, the most important requirement is that the physician have

direct supervision of the patient, which means the physician must be

in the office or clinic when the services are provided. There are no

exceptions to this requirement. If the physician is not in the

office/clinic when the services are provided, the service cannot be

billed under the physician's name. To do so constitutes federal health

care fraud, period.

Here's where it gets complicated. As stated, this is the Medicare

rule. It absolutely applies to Medicare and other federal pay

programs. But does it apply to private third-party pay plans? Maybe,

sometimes, with some carriers, in some cases. Some carriers use the

Medicare rule, others use variations of the rule, and still other

payers have no written policy on the subject, but some of these jokers

still try to enforce so called "unwritten policies and practices." The

practical problem is that it is virtually impossible to know the

"incident to" rules for all of a clinic's patients.

However, since the Medicare rule is by far the most restrictive, if

the clinic is properly billing under the Medicare rule, and

specifically, is in compliance with the direct supervision definition,

then it should be proper under any third-party payer "incident to"

rule. Does that mean it is absolutely fraudulent to bill a third-party

payer without compliance with the direct supervision rule? No, but I

would suggest this is a de facto safe harbor.

Unfortunately, it is virtually impossible for most MD/DC clinics to be

in compliance with the Medicare rule, for the simple reason that for

cost-savings reasons, most MD/DC clinics have part-time physicians.

Thus, whenever the part-time doctor is not present in the clinic, a

payer could take the position that bills for services submitted under

the physician's name is fraudulent under federal law. The ugly reality

is that billing services of ancillary health care personnel under a

part-time physician's provider number is, at best, a crapshoot in

today's environment.

Does this all these problems are resolved by hiring a full-time

doctor? Well, it certainly solves the problem of direct supervision.

However, other problems are likely just starting to surface. But more

on that another time.

References

1. At least one state (California) has taken the position that it is

unethical for a chiropractic consultant to sell equipment to clients.

However, such statements have no real legal force, since chiropractic

consulting is not regulated by any state or federal agency.

2. In the past year or two, as a result of some high-profile cases,

some consultants have backed off and started advising their clients to

bill chiropractic care under the chiropractor's provider number.

Richard Jaffe, Esq.

Richard Jaffe, Esq.

Houston, Texas

www.richardjaffe.com

Copyright Dynamic Chiropractic Feb 26, 2004

Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights

Reserved

posted by quackbuster @ 4:47 PM links to this post Comments |

Trackback

Links to this post:

See links to this post


No comments: