Deepan,
I
can't find any mention in the 270/271 IG of putting the Dependent info at the
Subscriber level if he is uniquely identified. The only transaction I know of
that allows this is the 278. Can you direct me to the text in the IG that you
read as allowing this?
As to
your questions, here are my opinions, for what they're
worth...
1)
IMO, it is not appropriate to put the Dependent info at the Subscribed level in
any situation.
2) I
would expect the Member ID to be printed on the ID card, even if the Insurance
co. (illegally) uses the SSN.
3)
This is closely related to #1. As I said, it is my opinion that there should
always be two HLs if the Patient is a Dependent.
4) I
pass on this one.
I'll
be interested to hear any other opinions.
Hal Scoggins
SBPA Systems, Inc. (281) 679-7272 x116
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. |
- RE: 270 Eligibility Subscriber - Dependent loop. Hal Scoggins
- RE: 270 Eligibility Subscriber - Dependent loop. Hirth, Alan
- RE: 270 Eligibility Subscriber - Dependent loop. Bruce Howard
