Chris,

I concur.

Every time I meet with a provider they start looking like deer in the
headlights when I try to explain this.  Part of the problem is the number of
vendors out there consistently telling them they will be compliant.  I am
not so sure the vendors are far off with their understanding.  Yet, we
continue to see major payers that are not yet at the point of introducing
anything.  The all or nothing concept with HIPAA is going to be devastating
to these providers, because they do not understand the additional data they
will be required to collect.

As a clearinghouse, we have advocated strongly for the staged approach.
Start publishing elements that are required and setting timeframes for them.
I think the biggest step for most entities will be moving from a flat NSF or
HCFA to a Looping ANSI, 4010 but not compliant.  Payers should be doing that
- NOW!  Next, start asking for and setting timeframes for the required
elements, specifically those that are readily available or relational to
current data.  Lastly, set timeframes for non-relational and
optional/situational data that the payer will require.  That basically
brings us to compliance. This will not only start getting reasonable efforts
made towards compliance, but it will educate the providers on what is at
hand as we go along. I think the perfect opportunity to make such a method
viable would be to have CMS take the lead in such a program.

Just a theory.

Greg Koller
Manager of Operations and Business Development
United Wisconsin Proservices
(414)226-5520
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 


 -----Original Message-----
From:   Christopher J. Feahr, OD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent:   Saturday, April 13, 2002 1:07 PM
To:     [EMAIL PROTECTED]; George Kaye; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:        Re: Code Set effectivity compliance testing

Kepa,
Has there been any discussion of the mechanism (and where its funding might 
come from) by which providers' software vendors can be EDUCATED regarding 
this critically important issue?  I have not met a single Office Management 
System vendor yet who understands that even if the X12 EDI messages are not 
going to be flying right out of the doctor's software, the required data 
elements for populating an 837 DO have to be in there and WILL have to be 
packaged up and handed off at some point to a "translator engine/entity" 
for conversion to the standard.  I doubt that more than 5% of the OMS 
vendor community gets it that NONE of the old claim standards map reliably 
and consistently to the new HIPAA standards, and that sending NSF and "1500 
print images" to a clearinghouse is NOT going to be much help to the 
doctor.  Unless CHs and payors are prepared to massively "relax" these 
standards for awhile, we will be looking at a 90% reject rate for claims 
from small providers.  This global misunderstanding (they don't even know 
that they don't know) may explain why almost no software vendors or doctors 
are coming to X12 meetings or asking questions about this... only a year 
before they are supposed to be in "testing mode".

(And if you think the OMS community is out of the loop on TCS standards, 
try asking a few doctors what they know about this!  I'm doing a primarily 
TCS-related HIPAA presentation to 50 or 60 eye doctors in N. Calif. next 
week and they are pretty excited about hearing this.  To date, all doctors 
have heard/read about HIPAA is the Privacy Rule.  They just assume that 
their OMS vendors are wiring the TCS stuff into their next system upgrade.)

Regards,
Chris

At 09:56 PM 4/8/02 -0600, Kepa Zubeldia wrote:
>George,
>
>That is a very interesting point.  Is your assumption that the
clearinghouse
>creates the transactions and has control of the code sets?  The fact that
the
>clearinghouse has demonstrated the "capability" to use a certain code set
>does not necessarily mean that each one of the providers clients of that
>clearinghouse is using that same code set.  I wish life was that easy.
>
>One of the typical "HIPAA Myths" is that the clearinghouses can magically
>make the providers compliant.  That is not the case.  Let's make sure that
>all the players understand what is their own responsibility.  If the
>expectations from providers are that their vendor or clearinghouse will
take
>care of HIPAA much like they took care of Y2K, we will run into big
problems
>when they wake up to the reality.
>
>Kepa
>
>
>
>
>On Monday 08 April 2002 02:58 pm, George Kaye wrote:
> > If a payer performs compliance testing with a clearinghouse for code set
> > effectivity for a professional claim (for example), has anyone thought
> > through the process of what that testing should consist of, so that the
> > payer can assume that those code sets will continue to be compliant from
> > that clearinghouse on an ongoing basis regardless of: the type of
> > professional claim (office visit, ambulance, physical therapy etc.), or
> > when the code is impacted by new code set releases by the DSMO's?
>
>To be removed from this list, go to: 
>http://snip.wedi.org/unsubscribe.cfm?list=business
>and enter your email address.
>
>The WEDI SNIP listserv to which you are subscribed is not moderated.  The 
>discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the 
>individual participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the 
>WEDI Board of Directors nor WEDI SNIP.  If you wish to receive an official 
>opinion, post your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at 
>http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/.
>Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is 
>specifically prohibited.

Christopher J. Feahr, OD
http://visiondatastandard.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cell/Pager: 707-529-2268        


To be removed from this list, go to:
http://snip.wedi.org/unsubscribe.cfm?list=business
and enter your email address.

The WEDI SNIP listserv to which you are subscribed is not moderated.  The
discussions on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual
participants, and do not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board
of Directors nor WEDI SNIP.  If you wish to receive an official opinion,
post your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues Database at
http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/.
Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is
specifically prohibited.

To be removed from this list, go to: http://snip.wedi.org/unsubscribe.cfm?list=business
and enter your email address.

The WEDI SNIP listserv to which you are subscribed is not moderated.  The discussions 
on this listserv therefore represent the views of the individual participants, and do 
not necessarily represent the views of the WEDI Board of Directors nor WEDI SNIP.  If 
you wish to receive an official opinion, post your question to the WEDI SNIP Issues 
Database at http://snip.wedi.org/tracking/.
Posting of advertisements or other commercial use of this listserv is specifically 
prohibited.

Reply via email to