Louisville Medicine Volume 65, Issue 10 | Page 7

From the PRESIDENT Robert A. Zaring, MD, MMM GLMS President | [email protected] GET EDUCATED on Modifier 25 Note: GLMS, on your behalf, has aggressively pushed back against Anthem’s changes to Modifier 25, changes which were going to significantly reduce physi- cian payments and hurt patient outcomes. Responding when the news broke, GLMS hosted a meeting in December 2017 between Anthem representatives and physicians at our headquarters, published an Op-Ed arguing against the changes in The Courier-Journal, and maintained our dialogue through an aggressive social med ia campaign which included the release of an informative and passionate DocTalks video. We are proud to say that our efforts were successful. Anthem has agreed to fully rescind their proposed cuts to Modifier 25. This could not have been done without the dedication of our physicians. Thank you all for your advocacy. I n the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote, ”But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such govern- ment, and to provide new guards for their future security.” No, I am not suggesting a revolution against our government, but those words stick in my mind when I consider some of the ploys insurance companies have used to decrease reim- bursements, deny claims or hinder patient treat- ment. The latest of these schemes is Anthem’s decrease in payment when using Modifier 25. For those unfamiliar with this change, I offer a brief history. Anthem decided in October of 2017 to make effective in January 2018 a reduc- tion of 50 percent for Evaluation and Manage- ment (E/M) services billed with a Current Pro- cedural Terminology. To better understand this, it is important to take a close look at Modifier 25. Modifier 25 is appended to an E/M service to indicate that a significant and separately identifi- able E/M service was provided on the same day as a minor surgical procedure. Anthem’s change will reduce by 50 percent the E/M service. This will significantly affect many providers such as Dermatology but others as well. The reason Mod- ifier 25 exists is so that when physicians identify other problems, they can take care of them at the same visit. Two examples the Kentucky Medical Association (KMA) have given on the use of Modifier 25 will better elucidate the issue. They include the following: 1. “A patient has a nosebleed. The physician performs packing of the nose in the office, which stops the bleeding. At the same visit, the phy- sician then evaluates the patient for moderate hypertension that was not well controlled and adjusts the antihypertensive medications.” 2. “A patient presents to the physician with symptoms of urinary retention. The physician performs a thorough E/M service and decides to perform a cystourethroscopy. Cystourethroscopy is performed the same day as the E/M code.” Anthem was contacted by numerous orga- nizations including the KMA and GLMS about this change. The result was that Anthem reduced the decrease from 50 percent to 25 percent. I find this wholly unacceptable, and simply the latest in a long train of abuses and usurpations perpe- trated on providers and patients. My grievances with this action are manifold. To begin, Anthem released the information regarding the decrease in a newsletter update and not in the orange en- velope as required by law for significant changes to a provider contract. Anthem’s argument was that a 50 percent decrease in reimbursement for this code was not a significant change. This is not a legitimate response. If a patient were to pay 50 percent of Anthem’s monthly premium, I can guarantee Anthem would consider that significant. To make matters worse in regarding this dramatic change, Anthem placed the infor- mation deep within the newsletter. In this action, Anthem not only disregarded the law, but they showed no concern for their customers or their covered patients. Modifier 25 is used so clinicians can do more work in one visit. This helps patients limit travel time and lost work, thus creating a fitter patient and workforce. With the decrease in reimbursement, physicians will likely opt for a return visit by the patient instead of interrupting clinic workflows as they might have tried to do before. All of this benefits no one except the deep pockets of Anthem. They will see a handsome 25 percent increase on the E/M code. But they could also potentially benefit when a patient can simply not return for a visit due to time constraints and Anthem saves by not having the patient get the care they need. Anthem now states the new decrease to Mod- ifier 25 is due to duplications in components of RVUs making up the E/M codes. But, when looking at the history, it is clear the change is really due to lazy auditing. Furthermore, in 2012 Anthem decided this was not a good idea. I won- der if this change of heart is due to their growing monopolistic share of the market in areas such as Kentucky, or is it related to losing money on their blocked merger with Cigna? Regardless of why the Anthem leadership has changed its strategy, the excuses and tactics used are preposterous and should be summarily rejected. We as physicians need to protect our patients and throw off the despotism of these actions because it is our right and duty. We must voice our displeasure with Anthem’s decision to Anthem, organized medicine and legal bodies, then explain the issue to patients so they may do the same. Dr. Zaring is an anatomic and clinical pathologist with Louisville Pathology Associates and practices at Jewish Hospital. MARCH 2018 5