In June, Dave Nicholson, President of PMI traveled with a team from HBMA (Healthcare Billing and Management Association) for their 10th annual advocacy meeting with CMS leaders and key congress committee members in Washington, DC.
At CMS, Dave led the discussion regarding the quality reporting portion of MIPS. This group spoke about the provider preference for claims-based reporting over registry reporting. Although CMS favors registry reporting because of the increased detail received, providers find claims-based reporting more cost effective, less time consuming, and less disruptive to the revenue cycle management process.
Another suggestion made by Dave’s committee was to revise the MIPS implementation timeline. For example, physician billing is now heavily reliant on technology and providers often find themselves dependent upon vendors to make changes to their software systems which can cause delay. Since that meeting, CMS released a more flexible timeline that includes four participation options for the 2017 reporting year.
MIPs feedback reporting was also cited as an area of importance to providers. CMS responded that they are working on a web portal that will provide a way for providers to track their progress. Real time accessible data will be essential in a provider’s ability to make adjustments during the reporting year.
Other agenda items covered at CMS during this visit are listed below. Please find the full HBMA publication here.
- Preparing for Alternative Payment Models
- Reducing MAC-Related Headaches
- Provider Enrollment and Oversight
- ICD-10 Update and Enforcing HIPAA Administration Simplification
- Eliminating LCDs in Favor of NCDs
- Investigation and Audits
The second day, HBMA traveled to Washington for discussions with AMA, MGMA, HIMSS, the US House of Representatives (Ways and Means Health Subcommittee, and the Senate Finance Committee.) One main area of discussion was regarding the timeframes set by congress when creating laws. In some cases, the overlapping of deadlines causes hardship to providers and a comprehensive review of timeframes should be considered when these congressional directives are made.
Overall, these meetings were a successful way to provide direct feedback to the individuals responsible for creating regulation and legislation that impacts the revenue cycle management industry. HBMA Government Relations Committee found the 10th year of advocacy to be one of the most important to date, especially with MACRA at the forefront of many discussions.