|
Missouri Health Care System to Pay $60 Million to Settle False Claims Act Allegations |
|
Written by Rob Kurtz
|
|
Wednesday, 23 July 2008 |
|
Lester E. Cox Medical Centers, a health care system headquartered in Springfield, Mo., will pay $60 million to settle claims that it violated the False Claims Act, the anti-kickback statute and the Stark statute, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.
|
|
read more »
|
|
|
Is Block Leasing in Trouble? |
|
Written by Scott Becker, JD, CPA, and Jason Greis, JD
|
|
Monday, 21 July 2008 |
The general concept over the past several years has been that block leasing presents less regulatory risk than per-click leasing. In essence, under a per-click lease, a party buys an image or test and resells it to a payor or patient. This type of arrangement is clearly subject to the anti-markup rules.
CMS continues to express concern about the growth of imaging costs to the Medicare program. The agency has taken three actions over the past eighteen months that may impact the imaging sector and its future ability to continue block leasing. CMS has: 1) commented that block leasing arrangements are also subject to the anti-markup rule; 2) articulated new situations in which the anti-markup rule for purchased diagnostic tests will apply; and 3) proposed new registration requirements for independent diagnostic testing facilities. This article briefly discusses these three issues.
|
|
read more »
|
|
|
In the News: Anesthesiology Practice Sues Physician for Breach of Employment Agreement |
|
Written by Staff
|
|
Sunday, 13 July 2008 |
|
An anesthesiology practice in Bloomington, Ill. is suing a former
physician member of the practice for breach of a non-compete clause
after the doctor agreed to provide anesthesiology services for a new
surgery center, according to Pantagraph.com.
|
|
read more »
|
|
|
CMS Continues Attempts to Address Anti-Markup Provisions with Two Alternatives |
|
Written by Staff
|
|
Sunday, 13 July 2008 |
|
CMS has proposed two alternatives to revise its anti-markup rule as part of its proposed 2009 changes to payment policies and rates under the Medicare physician fee schedule.
|
|
read more »
|
|
|
Individual Lacks Standing to Challenge Facility's Certificate of Need |
|
Written by Stephanie Wasek
|
|
Thursday, 10 July 2008 |
|
A man's challenge of a certificate of need issued by the Alaska Department of Health for an open-bore MRI facility cannot stand, because the individual is not "substantially affected" by the issuance, the Supreme Court of Alaska has ruled. |
|
read more »
|
|
|
Non-Compete Agreement Imposed by Doctor Group on Physician's Practice Upheld by Court |
|
Written by Stephanie Wasek
|
|
Thursday, 10 July 2008 |
|
An employment contract's non-compete clause did not unreasonably restrict a physician's practice, the Kansas Court of Appeals has ruled. The non-competition agreement in the contract between a physician group and a physician placed restrictions on where the physician could practice after employment was terminated. |
|
read more »
|
|
|
MarCap Acquisition by Tygris Completed |
|
Written by Staff
|
|
Friday, 27 June 2008 |
|
Tygris Commercial Finance Group, a recently formed commercial finance company, has completed its acquisition of substantially all of the assets and business of MarCap, a Chicago-based middle market healthcare equipment finance company. MarCap joins Tygris Asset Finance, Tygris's middle market equipment leasing and asset finance business led by Laird Boulden, and will continue to operate under the MarCap brand. |
|
read more »
|
|
|
In the News: MGMA Asks CMS to Take "Time Out" With Stark |
|
Written by Staff
|
|
Monday, 16 June 2008 |
|
The Medical Group Management Association has asked CMS to
take a “time out” concerning the growing complexity of Stark regulations.
|
|
read more »
|
|
|
Fee Splitting Arrangement Between Physicians and Medical Biller Invalidated by Court |
|
Written by Stephanie Wasek
|
|
Monday, 16 June 2008 |
|
An Illinois appeals court has ruled that a percentage-based fee arrangement between a physician group and a medical billing company is invalid, affirming an earlier circuit court decision. |
|
read more »
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next > End >>
|
| Results 10 - 18 of 52 |