I have been following this tread for some time and am fascinated over the
amount of time being dedicated to the ISA Receiver ID. It really does not
matter what the ISA Qualifier and Receiver ID are since they will be used as
a key to look up an EDI address and routing information. As long as the
i
Bob Poiesz has already explained why a receiver would be a
clearinghouse, e.g.,
(25 January) A clearinghouse can receive 10 837s from 10 providers. Each
provider can be sending claims to 10 different payers in their 837. When
the clearinghouse resorts and organizes the claims they produce 10 837s
Ajay:
I'm not (now) saying ZZ should be removed from the allowable list of
Interchange ID Qualifiers in the HIPAA IGs. But other than that,
there's really not too much we can say about ZZ, period. If you feel
otherwise, please feel free to cobble up a paragraph or two on its
proposed usage.
Bu
Rachel,
I think, it was my mistake not to include question from Chris in my response
below, to whom the original reply was. If you read it in that perspective,
what I am saying is very different (key point there being "at par with
proprietary message"). I can go on and explain "technically" why
Rachel, I cannot find any reference in the implementation guides (I am currently
studying the 276/277 transaction set) to the sender/receiver in an ISA refers to
payer/provider or provider/payer. Please point out to me where in the guides it
states that the ISA identifies payers and providers.
- Original Message -
From: William J. Kammerer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: 'WEDi/SNIP ID & Routing' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 8:28 AM
Subject: Re: A proposed work plan for this group
> We need consensus on the following issues:
>
> (1) Agreement that global IDs are
Michael,
Right on!
Rachel
-Original Message-
From: Michael Mattias/Tal Systems [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 9:30 AM
To: WEDI/SNIP Listserve
Subject: RE: Who am I? Sender, Receiver, Intermediary, or just plain
Chump?
I have followed this thread with some int
So, what's new here. The only valid and allowed ISA sender/receiver
identifiers are those specified in the HIPAA guides. Get over it, and get on
with it.
It seems to me the issue that should be addressed is not which coding system
the identifier is from, but rather the function that identifier sh
Sure, you can do whatever you want tothe test will be the acceptance of
the marketplace in what you do. Thus, it's vital to keep this in mind, and
the factors I mentioned below are all factors of marketplace acceptance.
Rachel
-Original Message-
From: William J. Kammerer [mailto:[EMA
Ron, while I don't disagree with your comments in general, keep in mind that
nowhere in the HIPAA guides is the ISA sender or receiver identified as any
other party than the provider or the payer. Nothing in the guides, which is
what the industry must use, indicates that the ISA sender or receiver
William,
>(2) Agreement that the ZZ qualifier is not to be used on the ISA. This
necessarily eliminates the use of proprietary payer or CH assigned
provider IDs.
While it ok to "recommend" that ZZ qualifier not be used, I think there has
to be a plan to address ZZ as well since it's use is qui
Would anyone disagree that the National Provider ID (NPI) and the
National Plan ID are really the best ways to identify providers and
payers - in both the application transaction sets *and* the ISA - if
they ever come to pass? If so, either ID type beats DUNS, HIN, FEIN,
etc., in the context of
We need consensus on the following issues:
(1) Agreement that global IDs are to be used for all parties (providers,
payers, TPAs, repricers, billing agents, clearinghouses, etc.). One or
more IDs - from one or more of the supported domains on the ISA - may be
used, chosen by the party being iden
13 matches
Mail list logo
