Kay, Thanks for the information. I don't mean to shoot the messenger, but how in the %@&*%@ would a mere mortal know that "X12N, TG2, WG5" = "276/277?" Just for fun, I tried to figure out which Task Group/Work Group would cover the 270/271 pair. I couldn't find any way to determine this other than going to each TG/WG one-by-one and read what their responsibilities are. I think I figured out that it would be TG2, WG1 - "Health Care Eligibility." But since "The Purpose and Scope Document is currently unavailable" for that WG, I can't be sure.
Surely there is a better way for the thousands of "participants" being coerced into this exercise to find their way to the various resources available. Can't someone, somewhere present this information in English? -----Original Message----- From: Kay Wyssbrod [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 11:17 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: 'Kay Wyssbrod'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: More 276/277 questions - they just keep surfacing Lin, each meeting the dialin number changes due to the sponsor of the call. I'd much prefer that those interested parties get the number by being on the 276/277 listserv: It's [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can sign up by going to DISA.org and select Accredited Standards Committee (X12), which will take you to a page where you can either select X12N for Healthcare or you can start looking for 'quick links' which will get you to 'listserv signup'. You want X12N, TG2, WG5 for the 276/277. Good luck! "Quinkert, Lin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 04/10/2002 10:11:54 AM To: 'Kay Wyssbrod' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: More 276/277 questions - they just keep surfacing RE: More 276/277 questions - they just keep surfacing Hi Kay, Would you post the 276/277 dial in number for those calls, please?� He (and others) may not have it. Thanks, Lin Quinkert GovConnect HIPAA Practice Manager (502) 905-1099 -----Original Message----- From: Kay Wyssbrod [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2002 8:13 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: More 276/277 questions - they just keep surfacing First of all, why didn't you use the 276/277 listserv?�� Also, you might attend the 276/277 phone conference meetings on every other Thursday at 1 pm ET. Secondly, if you also use the member id sent on the 276, that in combination with the provider id should get you the limited claims that would satisfy the privacy issue you raise. "Hal Scoggins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 04/09/2002 12:20:03 PM To:��� <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject:��� More 276/277 questions - they just keep surfacing Folks, Now that we're� wading deeper into the 276/277, more questions are surfacing. Hopefully, someone� monitoring this listserv can help�us address�them. I'll post more as I� remember them, but the immediate question we have is regarding the information� we send back to the originator of the 276 inquiry. There is a large� possibility that we will be unable to precisely identify the Provider specified� in the 276, since all we have to go on is a name and TIN. This being the case,� it is possible that we may find multiple claims that match the information� given. When this happens, the 276/277 IG indicates that we should return the� status of all claims we find that match the inquiry. But this raises questions� about privacy. Our impression is that the IGs are written strictly from a� technical perspective, with no�consideration of security and privacy� concerns. If we send back status info about all matching claims, without being� sure of precisely who the Provider is in the inquiry, are we going to be� violating some other piece of HIPAA? On a related� note; in the NM1 segment for the Service Provider, NM108 offers an "SV"� qualifier, with the note, "When the provider does not have a National Provider� ID and Payer has assigned a specific ID number to this provider this code is� required." We have assigned such an ID number to each provider in our system.� While this would help us "nail down" the provider, one of our claims processing trainers asserts that�it is unreasonable to expect a provider to� keep track of every unique ID number assigned to them by each of the potentially� hundreds of insurance plans they deal with. While the IG appears to give us� carte blanche�- perhaps even demands, if one gets right down to it� -�to reject any 276 that comes in without that ID included, folks in our� office with significant experience assure us that our assigned ID simply won't� show up on the 276. So where does that leave us?�If we accept the 276 without that ID,� since we have, indeed, assigned it, then we are accepting a non-compliant transaction, since the note says that it is "required." But it seems that we� will be rejecting 100% of the inquiries we receive, if we stubbornly insist on� adhering strictly to the rules. Any thoughts on either of these� issues? Hal� Scoggins SBPA Systems, Inc. (281) 679-7272� x116 To be removed from this list, go to: http://snip.wedi.org/unsubscribe.cfm?listusiness 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. To be removed from this list, go to: http://snip.wedi.org/unsubscribe.cfm?listusiness 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=siness 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, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please note that it may take up to 72 hours to process your request. ====================================================== 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.
