|
|
This proposed rule is no longer the most current information.
It will continue to be available for reference, but the
final rule has been published. View
the final rule.
|
a. Background
Often, health care providers may need to verify not only that a
patient has health insurance coverage but also what specific benefits
are included in that coverage. Having such information helps the
health care provider to collect correct patient deductibles, co-insurance
amounts, and co-payments and to provide an accurate bill for the
patient and all pertinent health plans, including secondary payers.
In addition, simple economics dictates that the out-of-pocket cost
to the patient may affect treatment choices. The best case is when
there are two equally effective treatment options and coverage is
only available for one. More often, the question may be whether
a particular treatment is covered or not. Here is an example: Jane
Doe has cancer and a bone marrow transplant is the treatment of
last resort. Since insurance coverage does not extend to "experimental
therapies," the question becomes: Does Jane's insurance cover
a bone marrow transplant for her diagnosis? If she has leukemia,
the treatment may be covered; if she has cervical cancer, it may
not be. Whether Jane could afford to pay out-of-pocket for such
a treatment could affect her treatment choice.
The value of eligibility information is enhanced if it can be acquired
quickly. Traditional methods of communication (that is, by phone
or mail) are highly inefficient. Patients and health plans find
it disturbing when the deductible and co-pays are not correctly
applied.
When insurance inquiries of this sort are transmitted electronically,
health care providers can receive the information from the health
plan almost immediately. However, in current practice, each health
plan may require that the health care provider's request be in a
preferred format, which often does not match the format required
by any other health plan. This means that the health care provider
must maintain the hardware and software capability to send multiple
inquiry formats and receive multiple response formats. Because of
this situation, adoption of electronic methods for inquiries has
been inhibited, and reliance on paper forms or the telephone for
such inquiries has continued.
i. Candidates for the Standard
The HISB developed an inventory of health care information standards
to be considered by the Secretary of HHS in the adoption of standards.
The ANSI ASC X12N 270 - Health Care Eligibility Benefit Inquiry
and companion 271 - Health Care Eligibility Benefit Response, the
ASC X12N Interactive Health Care Eligibility/Benefit Inquiry (IHCEBI)
and its companion the Interactive Health Care Eligibility/Benefit
Response (IHCEBR), the NCPDP Telecommunications Standard Format,
and the NCPDP Telecommunication Claim Standard for Pharmaceutical
Professional Services are the standards available for the electronic
exchange of patient eligibility and coverage information.
ii. Recommended Standard
We propose to adopt the ANSI ASC X12N 270 - Health Care Eligibility
Benefit Inquiry and the companion ASC X12N 271 - Health Care Eligibility
Benefit Response as the standard for the eligibility for a health
plan transaction.
When evaluated against the criteria (discussed earlier) for choosing
a national standard, the ASC X12 Transaction Sets 270/271 met the
criteria more often than did the ASC X12 interactive or the NCPDP
transactions. The ASC X12N 270/271 transaction set is supported
by an accredited standards setting organization ASC X12 (criteria
#5). By comparison with the alternatives, the ASC X12N 270/271 would
have relatively low additional development and implementation costs
and would be consistent with other standards in this proposed rule
(criteria #4 and #3). The NCPDP standards, because they are specific
to pharmacy transactions, were rejected because they would not meet
the needs of the rest of the health care system (criteria #2), whereas
the ASC X12N 270/271 would.
The X12N subcommittee and its Workgroup 1, which is responsible
for the eligibility transaction, recommended in June 1997 that the
ASC X12N 270/271 be adopted as the HIPAA standard (criteria #5).
There are specific, technical reasons against adoption of the IHCEBI/IHCEBR
at this time. The IHCEBI/IHCEBR is based on UNEDIFACT, not ASC X12N,
syntax. Because of concurrent changes in UNEDIFACT design rules,
the IHCEBI/IHCEBR is not a complete or consistent standard. It has
not been classified by UNEDIFACT as ready to implement. In X12N,
the current version of IHCEBI/IHCEBR is 3070, and we believe that
current use is centered on a prior version (3051), which is not
millennium compliant. The IHCEBI/IHCEBR transaction is not ready
to be moved into version 4 (4010), as are the other transactions
being recommended in this proposed rule. We also believe that current
use is quite limited, and not consistent across users; in effect,
current uses of this transaction have been implemented in proprietary
format(s). For all these reasons, the ICHEBI/ICHEBR is neither technically
ready nor stable and cannot be recommended as a standard at this
time. Thus, the IHCEBI/IHCEBR would require higher additional development
and implementation costs (criteria #4), and they would not be consistent
or uniform with the other standards selected (criteria #3).
If an interactive eligibility transaction standard were ratified
by an accredited standards setting organization sometime in the
future, then it could be considered for adoption as a HIPAA standard.
However, at this time, we expect that any future standard for an
interactive eligibility transaction is likely to differ substantially
from the current IHCEBI/IHCEBR and the time to readiness could be
substantial as well (criteria #6).
The goal of administrative simplification, as expressed in the
law, is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the health
care system (criteria #1). Whereas it might seem that the interactive
message would yield greater efficiencies in terms of time saved,
similar efficiencies are available with the ASC X12N 270/271. In
fact, the ASC X12N 270 can be used to submit a single eligibility
inquiry electronically for a very quick turnaround 271 response.
Response times, measured in seconds, would compare favorably to
a true interactive transaction and would be a substantial
improvement over telephone inquiries or paper methods of eligibility
determination.
Transactions concerning eligibility for a health plan would be
used only to verify the patients eligibility and benefits;
they would not provide a history of benefit use. The electronic
exchange using these standards would occur usually between health
care providers and health plans, but the standard would support
electronic inquiry and response among other entities. In addition
to uses by various health care providers (for example, hospitals,
laboratories, and physicians), the ASC X12N 270/271 can be used
by an insurance company, a health maintenance organization, a preferred
provider organization, a health care purchaser, a professional review
organization, a third-party administrator, vendors (for example,
billing services), service bureaus (such as value-added networks),
and government agencies (Medicare, Medicaid, and CHAMPUS).
The eligibility transaction is designed to be used for simple status
requests as well as more complex requests that may be related to
specific clinical procedures. General requests might include queries
for: all benefits and coverage conditions, eligibility status (whether
the patient is active in the health plan), maximum benefits (policy
limits), exclusions, in-plan/out- of-plan benefits, coordination
of benefits information, deductibles, and copayments. Specific requests
might include procedure coverage dates; procedure coverage maximum;
amounts for deductible, co-insurance, co-payment, or patient responsibility;
coverage limitations; and noncovered amounts.
Another part of the ASC X12N 271 is designed to handle requests
for eligibility rosters, which are essentially lists
of entities -- subscribers and dependents, health care providers,
employer groups, health plans -- and their relationships to each
other. For example, this transaction might be used by a health plan
to submit a roster of patients to a health care provider to designate
a primary care physician or to alert a hospital about forthcoming
admissions. We are not recommending this use of the ASC X12N 270/271
at this time because the roster implementation guide is not millennium
compliant and the standards development process for the implementation
guide is not completed. After the standards development process
for the roster implementation guide is completed, it may be considered
for adoption as a national standard.
The data elements for this transaction, and other information,
may be found in Addendum 6.
b. Requirements
i. Health plans.
In § 142.1604, Requirements: Health plans, we would require
health plans to use only the standard specified in § 142.1602
for electronic eligibility transactions.
ii. Health care clearinghouses.
We would require in § 142.1606 that each health care clearinghouse
use the standard specified in § 142.1602 for eligibility transactions.
iii. Health care providers.
In § 142.1608, Requirements: Health care providers, we would
require each health care provider that transmits any health plan
eligibility transactions electronically to use the standard specified
in § 142.1602 for those transactions.
c. Implementation Guide and Source
The implementation guide is available for the ASC X12N 270/271
(004010X092) at no cost from the Washington Publishing Company site
on the World Wide Web at the following address: http://www.wpc-edi.com/hipaa/.
The data definitions and description of data conditions may also
be obtained from this website.
Users without access to the Internet may purchase implementation
guides from Washington Publishing Company directly. Washington Publishing
Company, 806 W. Diamond Ave., Suite 400, Gaithersburg, MD, 20878;
telephone 301-590-9337; FAX: 301-869-9460.
|
 |
 |