Polsinelli Shughart PC Health Care Law In the News
Attorneys

Matthew J. Murer
Practice Area Chair

Alan K. Parver
Practice Area Vice-Chair

Janice A. Anderson
Douglas K. Anning
Cynthia E. Berry
Mary Beth Blake
Sara V. Blass
Tina M. Boschert
Gerald W. Brenneman
Teresa A. Brooks
Jared O. Brooner
Sera Chong
Anne M. Cooper
S. Jay Dobbs
Meredith A. Duncan
Fredric J. Entin
Jennifer L. Evans
Colleen M. Faddick
T. Jeffrey Fitzgerald
Kara M. Friedman
Rebecca L. Frigy
Randy S. Gerber
Jonathan K. Henderson
Jay M. Howard
Sara V. Iams
George Jackson, III
Bruce A. Johnson
Joan B. Killgore
Anne L. Kleindienst
Chad K. Knight
Jason T. Lundy
Patrick J. Martinez
Jane K. McCahill
Ann C. McCullough
Aileen T. Murphy
Gerald A. Niederman
Edward F. Novak
Thomas P. O'Donnell
Daniel S. Reinberg
Randal L. Schultz
Charles P. Sheets
Kathryn M. Stalmack
Leah Mendelsohn Stone
Chad C. Stout
Steven K. Stranne
William E. Swart
Emily C. Tremmel
Andrew B. Turk
Jennifer L. Weinfeld
Kimela R. West
Mark R. Woodbury

 

Additional Health Care
Professionals


Julius W. Hobson, Jr.
Beverly A. Pheto
Harry Sporidis

To learn more about our
Health Care practice,
click here.

 

 

www.polsinelli.com

July 2011

 

Credentialing and Privileging of Telemedicine Providers: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Final Rule

A Polsinelli Shughart Update

 

In May 2011, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) released its final rule making changes to Medicare Conditions of Participation (CoP) for hospitals and critical access hospitals (CAH) to create a new process for the credentialing and privileging of telemedicine practitioners. CMS’s intent in implementing these changes is to remove the hardship and financial burden imposed on hospitals and CAHs by current telemedicine credentialing and privileging requirements. The final rule became effective on July 5, 2011.

Previously, the CoP required a hospital or CAH to thoroughly examine and verify credentialing information and make independent decisions to privilege practitioners providing telemedicine services, as if the telemedicine practitioner practiced on-site. These requirements conflicted with The Joint Commission (JC) standards, which permitted a form of “privileging by proxy,” allowing hospitals to grant telemedicine privileges in reliance on credentialing information from the distant site hospital. Because “privileging by proxy” was not permitted by the Medicare CoPs, JC changed its standards governing privileging of telemedicine practitioners to require a hospital or CAH who uses JC for “deemed status” to make independent privileging decisions but to allow the Medicare participating hospital that otherwise privileged the telemedicine practitioner to serve as a Credentialing Verification Organization (CVO) for the hospitals or CAHs that obtained the telemedicine services. Under the new COPs, subject to certain safeguards, a hospital or CAH now may grant telemedicine privileges, by relying on the credentialing and privileging information of the distant site Medicare-participating hospital. In addition, the CoPs allow the originating site hospital or CAH to grant telemedicine privileges based on credentialing information from a distant site telemedicine entity that is not a Medicare participating hospital, such as a teleradiology entity, referred to as “distant site telemedicine entities” or “DSTEs”.

What Does This Mean?

To use this new “proxy” credentialing and privileging process for telemedicine practitioners, certain requirements must be met. The originating site hospital or CAH (i.e. the hospital or CAH that is obtaining the telemedicine services) must have a written agreement with the distant site hospital or DSTE. If the distant-entity is a Medicare-participating hospital, the governing body of the originating site hospital or CAH must ensure the agreement specifies that it is the distant site hospital’s responsibility to comply with current CMS credentialing and privileging requirements. If the distant site entity is a DSTE, the governing body of the originating site hospital or CAH must ensure the agreement requires the DSTE to furnish the credentialing services, in a manner that enables the originating hospital or CAH to comply with all applicable CoPs and standards.

What You Need To Do Now

Hospitals and CAHs should consider whether they want to take advantage of the new CoP for credentialing telemedicine practitioners. If so, the hospital or CAH should review and, if necessary, update its medical staff bylaws. Form agreements should be developed that incorporate the specific CoP requirements for distant site Medicare-participating hospitals and DSTEs, respectively, and include other beneficial provisions (e.g., protections for patient health information). State law peer review confidentiality standards should be evaluated against the CoP requirement for disclosure of complaints and adverse events concerning the telemedicine practitioner. Until JC updates its standards, hospitals and CAHs that use JC-accreditation for deemed status should wait to fully implement the CoP proxy privileging process.

To read more about the Final Rule, click here.

For More Information

If you would like more information on this topic, please contact:

 

Polsinelli Shughart | In the News

Headlines and Bylines from polsinelli.com

 
To learn more about our RSS feeds, click here.

Polsinelli Shughart Expands Real Estate Practice in Denver

Polsinelli Shughart Receives Top Rankings in 2011 Chambers USA

e-Alert: Climate Change Litigation Tempered by High Court: Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Federal Common Law Nuisance Claims

Get more news from polsinelli.com.

   
Click here to learn more about our RSS feeds. Click here to learn more about our RSS feeds.

About Polsinelli Shughart PC

With more than 530 attorneys, Polsinelli Shughart is a national law firm that is a recognized leader in the areas of business law, financial services, real estate and business litigation. Serving corporate, institutional and individual clients, Polsinelli Shughart is redefining the business of law by sharing ideas, goals and outcomes with its clients. The firm builds enduring relationships by creating value through legal services – with passion, ingenuity and a sense of urgency. The firm can be found at www.polsinelli.com. Polsinelli Shughart PC. In California, Polsinelli Shughart LLP.

 
       
         
         
         
         
         
         
Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Edwardsville, Jefferson City, Kansas City, Los Angeles, New York Overland Park, Phoenix, St. Joseph, St. Louis, Springfield, Topeka, Washington, D.C., Wilmington DE
 

To update your email preferences, please contact Therese O'Shea. To opt out of these communications, click the unsubscribe link below.

Polsinelli Shughart provides this material for informational purposes only. The material provided herein is general and is not intended to be legal advice. Nothing herein should be relied upon or used without consulting a lawyer to consider your specific circumstances, possible changes to applicable laws, rules and regulations and other legal issues. Receipt of this material does not establish an attorney-client relationship.

Polsinelli Shughart is very proud of the results we obtain for our clients, but you should know that past results do not guarantee future results; that every case is different and must be judged on its own merits; and that the choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements.

Polsinelli Shughart PC. In California, Polsinelli Shughart LLP.

Polsinelli Shughart® is a registered trademark of Polsinelli Shughart PC.


Copyright © 2011 Polsinelli Shughart PC ®.

 
           
Polsinelli Shughart