August 17, 2009 | Judith Kares | Comments 0
Email This Post Print This Post

Inpatient HINNs: Protecting the hospital’s right to recover payment for non-covered services

Last week, I participated in an HCPro audioconference on HINNs. “HINN” stands for hospital-issued notice of non-coverage. It’s the inpatient equivalent of an advanced beneficiary notice (ABN). Under Medicare’s limitation on liability (LOL) provisions, hospitals are required to provide prior notice, in a prescribed form, when certain outpatient or inpatient services ordered by a physician do not meet Medicare’s medical necessity guidelines for the patient’s condition.

In such cases, the ABN is the prescribed form of prior notice for outpatient services, while the HINN is the prescribed from of prior notice for inpatient services. Although the prior notice requirements for LOL have been in place for a number of years, hospitals continue to struggle to provide timely, appropriate notification, particularly in the inpatient setting.

In the inpatient setting, LOL applies to the following:

  • Inpatient services (in whole [entire stay] or in part) that
    • Are not considered reasonable and necessary;
    • May be safely provided in another lower acuity setting; or
    • Are custodial in nature; or
  • Severable inpatient services ordered during an otherwise covered inpatient stay that are not considered reasonable and necessary under a written Medicare policy and are not tied to the reasons justifying that inpatient stay

When any of these inpatient situations arise, hospitals must provide the appropriate HINN notice prior to the performance of the services in order to reserve the right to bill the beneficiary for these services if Medicare agrees that they are non-covered. Currently, there are three different HINN forms in effect. They are all designed to notify the beneficiary of potential liability for non-covered inpatient services in the circumstances identified above. The current HINNs include the following:

The Preadmission/Admission HINN is used when the hospital believes that the entire stay fails to meet Medicare’s inpatient medical necessity guidelines. It doesn’t require the physician’s agreement, but must be provided no later than the day of admission. Notice should be provided as soon as possible to minimize the hospital’s liability for services provided during that stay.

HINN 12 is provided during a continuing stay which initially meets inpatient guidelines. At some point, however, the hospital decides that it is no longer medically necessary for the patient to remain, and proposes, with the agreement of the patient’s physician, to discharge the patient. The patient disagrees with the hospital’s discharge decision and remains in the hospital past midnight of the day of the proposed discharge without seeking timely review of the hospital’s discharge decision by the QIO (quality improvement organization). (Timely review requires a request for review prior to midnight of the day of the proposed discharge.) HINN 12 notifies the patient that he or she will be liable for all services provided after midnight, unless the QIO (if review is requested) disagrees with the hospital’s discharge decision.

HINN 11 is distinguishable from the other two HINNs in that it only applies to discrete, severable services ordered during an otherwise covered inpatient stay. Those discrete, severable services must be excluded from coverage as medically unnecessary under a written Medicare policy. In addition, those services cannot be bundled into or integral to payment or treatment for the diagnoses or reasons justifying that inpatient stay. Prior notice must be provided to both the patient and to the ordering physician and becomes effective immediately upon delivery. Although the Preadmission/Admission HINN is relatively easy to deliver as part of the registration process, timely delivery of the HINN 12 and HINN 11 are more problematic. With all three HINNs, it’s essential to have an effective case management/utilization review (CM/UR) function to identify situations requiring the respective HINNs, as well as to assure timely delivery of the appropriate form.

Once delivered, the hospital must be sure to document delivery and communicate relevant information to other departments with related functions (e.g., coding, billing, finance, etc.). Hospitals are encouraged to review their existing processes to determine whether improvements are needed to protect their right to recover from beneficiaries when LOL applies in the inpatient setting.

Entry Information

Filed Under: IPPS

Tags:

Judith Kares About the Author: Judith Kares is an instructor for HCPro's Medicare Boot Camp - Hospital Version. Judith has also been involved in the following:

  • Development of comprehensive compliance programs
  • Initial and follow-up risk assessments
  • Development and implementation of compliance training programs
  • Compliance audits and internal investigations
  • Research/advice regarding specific risk areas
  • Development of corrective action programs
Prior to beginning her current legal/consulting practice, Judith spent a number of years in private law practice, representing hospitals and other health care clients, and then as in-house legal counsel. In that capacity, she served first as Assistant General Counsel and Director of the Legal Department for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Arizona (BCBSAZ) and then as Deputy General Counsel, Regulatory and Contract Compliance, with Blue Cross and Blue Shield of the National Capital Area (BCBSNCA) in Washington, D.C.

In both in-house positions, Judith had primary responsibility for contracting and regulatory compliance. The latter included oversight of federal and state health care programs. BCBSAZ was a fiscal intermediary, a Medicare risk and AHCCCS (Arizona's managed care alternative to traditional Medicaid) contractor, as well as a participating contractor under the national Blue Cross/Blue Shield Federal Employee Program.

Judith is also an adjunct faculty member at the University of Phoenix, where she teaches courses in business and health care law and ethics. She is an advocate for the use of alternatives to traditional dispute resolution, having participated in the volunteer mediation program in the Justice Courts of Maricopa County, Arizona. Judith is a frequent speaker at healthcare-related seminars. In addition to her membership in the State Bar of Arizona and the Tennessee Bar Association, Judith is a member of the American Health Lawyers Association, the Health Care Compliance Association, and the Arizona Association of Health Care Lawyers.

Judith earned her Juris Doctor degree (with high distinction) from The University of Iowa, College of Law and her B.A. (with highest distinction) from Purdue University.

RSSPost a Comment  |  Trackback URL