Relias Media - Continuing Medical Education Publishing

The trusted source for

healthcare information and

CONTINUING EDUCATION.

  • Sign In
  • Sign Out
  • MyAHC
    • Home
      • Home
      • Newsletters
      • Blogs
      • Archives
      • CME/CE Map
      • Shop
    • Emergency
      • All Products
      • Publications
      • Study Guides
      • Live Webinars
      • On-Demand Webinars
      • Libraries
    • Hospital
      • All Products
      • Publications
      • Study Guides
      • Live Webinars
      • On-Demand Webinars
      • Libraries
    • Clinical
      • All Products
      • Publications
      • Study Guides
      • Live Webinars
      • On-Demand Webinars
    • All Access
      • Learn More
      • My Subscription
    • My Account
      • My Subscriptions
      • My Content
      • My Orders
      • My CME/CE
      • My Transcript
    Home » False Claims Act Ruling Is a Win for Healthcare Providers

    False Claims Act Ruling Is a Win for Healthcare Providers

    September 1, 2019
    No Comments
    Reprints
    Facebook Twitter Linkedin Share Share

    Related Products

    Defining ‘opt-out’ policies for HIPAA privacy rule is a challenge for providers | Single Article

    Employee wins groundbreaking claim for mental disability | Single Article

    Providers rework privacy plans for final HIPAA rule | Single Article

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    A recent ruling in a False Claims Act Case affirms that relators must be specific with claims. Summary judgment was issued because the relator did not tie allegations to particular patients and bills.

    • The case shows the need for good chart hygiene.
    • Sometimes “little data” are as important as “big data.”
    • Bookkeeping discipline is critical in billing cases.

    Risk managers received good news from a recent ruling in a False Claims Act (FCA) case that means that relators alleging medically unnecessary treatment must provide specific evidence to prove their case.

    The ruling came in an Illinois federal court that entered summary judgment in favor of skilled nursing facilities and a therapy provider in a Medicare fraud case. The relators alleged that the defendants furnished medically unnecessary therapy. (The case is available online at: https://bit.ly/31sqnmn.)

    The court determined that in such cases there must be a clear showing of why a particular episode of therapy was improper for a certain patient, explains Daniel T. Hartnett, JD, an attorney with Clark Hill in Chicago and one of the lead attorneys for the defendants. The court also said that the relators must link that improper treatment to a particular claim tendered to Medicare.

    The relator was a former corporate nurse based at a skilled nursing facility in Long Grove, IL. He alleged in a 2010 lawsuit that the facility and two other skilled nursing facilities and a therapy provider committed fraud by providing therapy that was medically unnecessary. They maximized the number of days billed to Medicare at the highest possible reimbursement level, the nurse claimed.

    An expert for the relator estimated damages to the government at more than $120 million, but the judge granted the facilities’ motions for judgment on all claims because the relator did not provide evidence showing the medically unnecessary care was provided to a particular patient.

    “The lesson for healthcare organizations is that charting hygiene has to be at top of mind at all times. Bookkeeping discipline also has to be a top priority,” Hartnett says. “Those are hardly startling revelations, but they are so critical because in these cases some insider with knowledge of how the organization does business is painting something as improper. You don’t have someone who is not knowledgeable, and they can make allegations that can be quite hurtful.”

    Keep an Eye on Little Data

    The case also illustrates that even in the era of big data, sometimes the little data matter the most, Hartnett says. The relator made serious allegations, and the statistical expert estimated a substantial defrauding of the government, but Hartnett and his co-counsel insisted that the relator prove the most basic facts of the case.

    The relator claimed that the nursing facility provided therapy to the patients that was not medically necessary. He did not claim that the facility just billed for the therapy without providing it, notes Mason N. Floyd, JD, also an attorney with Clark Hill in Chicago.

    “The relator in this case tried to look at the data as a whole, doing a statistical analysis of all the days and minutes of therapy that we billed Medicare for. In the end, that proved insufficient because he could not point to a single instance of therapy that was not medically necessary or a single bill to Medicare that was false,” Floyd says. “Instead, he wanted to do a 30,000-foot level analysis and tell the court these data were so out of line that it exemplifies a pattern of fraud. The court said ‘no, you still have to get down to the little data — the claims, the charts.’ That should be very reassuring to healthcare facilities.”

    Hartnett notes that the case could have turned out very differently for the skilled nursing facilities if the judge had not insisted on specific findings of medically unnecessary care tied to specific patients and bills.

    “The exposure in these False Claims Act cases is so immense that these cases tend to become something of a blood sport,” he says. “Once past the motion to dismiss, there is no easy exit point without paying immense amounts of money.”

    Good risk management is the key to defending these cases, Hartnett says.

    “I know it’s expensive and it requires lots of repetition when you’re educating your frontline staff, but if you are ever called to answer for the care you billed Medicare for, you’ll be glad you took the necessary steps to document the medical necessity of care,” Hartnett says. “This judgment should reinforce the sound risk management processes that facilities should already have in place.”

    SOURCES

    • Mason N. Floyd, JD, Clark Hill, Chicago. Phone: (312) 360-5032. Email: mfloyd@clarkhill.com.
    • Daniel T. Hartnett, JD, Clark Hill, Chicago. Phone: (312) 360-5020. Email: dhartnett@clarkhill.com.

    Post a comment to this article

    Report Abusive Comment

    www.reliasmedia.com

    Healthcare Risk Management

    View PDF
    Healthcare Risk Management (Vol. 41, No. 9) - September 2019
    September 1, 2019

    Table Of Contents

    Diagnostic Errors Tied to Specific Diseases, Showing Focus for Risk Managers

    Patients Leaving AMA Require Good Communication to Avoid Liability

    Legislation Aimed at Surprise Billing Could Bring Liabilities

    ‘Second Victim’ May Not Be the Best Approach to Adverse Events

    DOJ Specifies What Can Earn Credit in False Claims Investigations

    False Claims Act Ruling Is a Win for Healthcare Providers

    Opioid Order Should Ease Physician Discretion

    Gastroenterologist’s Negligent Procedure Results in Patient’s Death, $4.8 Million Verdict

    Misreading of Test Results Causes More Harm, Results in $3.5 Million Verdict

    Vendors Continue to Be Weak Point in HIPAA Security

    Checklist Items for Selecting a Compliant Vendor

    Social Engineering Scams, Attacks Can Threaten HIPAA Security

    Begin Test

    Buy this Issue/Course

    Financial Disclosure: Author Greg Freeman, Editor Jill Drachenberg, Editor Jonathan Springston, Editorial Group Manager Leslie Coplin, Accreditations Manager Amy Johnson, MSN, RN, CPN, and Nurse Planner Maureen Archambault report no consultant, stockholder, speaker’s bureau, research, or other financial relationships with companies having ties to this field of study. Consulting Editor Arnold Mackles, MD, MBA, LHRM, discloses that he is an author and advisory board member for The Sullivan Group and that he is owner, stockholder, presenter, author, and consultant for Innovative Healthcare Compliance Group.

    Shop Now: Search Products

    • Subscription Publications
    • Books & Study Guides
    • Webinars
    • Group & Site
      Licenses
    • State CME/CE
      Requirements

    Webinars And Events

    View All Events

    Free Email Newsletters

    All Fields Required

    E-Newsletter Options
    • Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education
    • American Nurses Credentialing Center
    • American College of Emergency Physician
    • American Board of Internal Medicine: Maintenance of Certification
    • California Board of Registered Nursing
    • Commission for Case Manager Certification
    • American Academy of Pediatrics
    • American Osteopathic Association
    • Home
      • Home
      • Newsletters
      • Blogs
      • Archives
      • CME/CE Map
      • Shop
    • Emergency
      • All Products
      • Publications
      • Study Guides
      • Live Webinars
      • On-Demand Webinars
      • Libraries
    • Hospital
      • All Products
      • Publications
      • Study Guides
      • Live Webinars
      • On-Demand Webinars
      • Libraries
    • Clinical
      • All Products
      • Publications
      • Study Guides
      • Live Webinars
      • On-Demand Webinars
    • All Access
      • Learn More
      • My Subscription
    • My Account
      • My Subscriptions
      • My Content
      • My Orders
      • My CME/CE
      • My Transcript
    • Help
    • Search
    • About Us
    • Sign In
    • Register
    Relias Media - Continuing Medical Education Publishing

    The trusted source for

    healthcare information and

    CONTINUING EDUCATION.

    Customer Service

    customerservice@reliasmedia.com

    U.S. and Canada: 1-800-688-2421

    International +1-404-262-5476

    Accounts Receivable

    1-800-370-9210
    ReliasMedia_AR@reliasmedia.com

    Mailing Address

    • 1010 Sync St., Suite 100
      Morrisville, NC 27560-5468
      USA

    © 2019 Relias. All rights reserved.

    Privacy Policy  Terms of Use  Contact Us  Reprints  Group Sales

    For DSR inquiries or complaints, please reach out to Wes Vaux, Data Privacy Officer, DPO@relias.com

    Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing