{"title":"Upcoding in medicare: where does it matter most?","authors":"Keith A Joiner, Jianjing Lin, Juan Pantano","doi":"10.1186/s13561-023-00465-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Upcoding in Medicare has been a topic of interest to economists and policy makers for nearly 40 years. While upcoding is generally understood as \"billing for services at higher level of complexity than the service actually pro- vided or documented,\" it has a wide range of definitions within the literature. This is largely because the financial incentives across programs and aspects under the coding control of billing specialists and providers are different, and have evolved substantially over time, as has the published literature. Arguably, the primary importance of analyzing upcoding in different parts of Medicare is to inform policy makers on the magnitude of the process and to suggest approaches to mitigate the level of upcoding. Financial estimates for upcoding in traditional Medicare (Medicare Parts A and B), are highly variable, in part reflecting differences in methodology for each of the services covered. To resolve this variability, we used summaries of audit data from the Comprehensive Error Rate Testing program for the period 2010-2019. This program uses the same methodology across all forms of service in Medicare Parts A and B, allowing direct comparisons of upcoding magnitude. On average, upcoding for hospitalization under Part A represents $656 million annually (or 0.53% of total Part A annual expenditures) during our sample period, while up- coding for physician services under Part B is $2.38 billion annually (or 2.43% of Part B annual expenditures). These numbers compare to the recent consistent estimates from multiple different entities putting upcoding in Medicare Part C at $10-15 billion annually (or approximately 2.8-4.2% of Part C annual expenditures). Upcoding for hospitalization under Medicare Part A is small, relative to overall upcoding expenditures.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10759668/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13561-023-00465-4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Upcoding in Medicare has been a topic of interest to economists and policy makers for nearly 40 years. While upcoding is generally understood as "billing for services at higher level of complexity than the service actually pro- vided or documented," it has a wide range of definitions within the literature. This is largely because the financial incentives across programs and aspects under the coding control of billing specialists and providers are different, and have evolved substantially over time, as has the published literature. Arguably, the primary importance of analyzing upcoding in different parts of Medicare is to inform policy makers on the magnitude of the process and to suggest approaches to mitigate the level of upcoding. Financial estimates for upcoding in traditional Medicare (Medicare Parts A and B), are highly variable, in part reflecting differences in methodology for each of the services covered. To resolve this variability, we used summaries of audit data from the Comprehensive Error Rate Testing program for the period 2010-2019. This program uses the same methodology across all forms of service in Medicare Parts A and B, allowing direct comparisons of upcoding magnitude. On average, upcoding for hospitalization under Part A represents $656 million annually (or 0.53% of total Part A annual expenditures) during our sample period, while up- coding for physician services under Part B is $2.38 billion annually (or 2.43% of Part B annual expenditures). These numbers compare to the recent consistent estimates from multiple different entities putting upcoding in Medicare Part C at $10-15 billion annually (or approximately 2.8-4.2% of Part C annual expenditures). Upcoding for hospitalization under Medicare Part A is small, relative to overall upcoding expenditures.
近 40 年来,医疗保险中的 "向上编码 "一直是经济学家和政策制定者关注的话题。一般认为,"向上编码 "是指 "以比实际提供或记录的服务复杂程度更高的服务计费",但文献中对其有多种定义。这主要是因为不同项目的财务激励机制以及计费专家和医疗服务提供者对编码控制的不同方面各不相同,并且随着时间的推移而发生了很大变化,公开发表的文献也是如此。可以说,分析医疗保险不同部分的向上编码的主要意义在于告知政策制定者该过程的规模,并提出减轻向上编码水平的方法。对传统医疗保险(医疗保险 A 部分和 B 部分)中的 "向上编码 "进行的财务估算存在很大差异,部分原因是每项承保服务的方法不同。为解决这一差异,我们使用了 2010-2019 年期间全面错误率测试计划的审计数据摘要。该计划在医疗保险 A 部分和 B 部分的所有服务形式中使用相同的方法,可直接比较向上编码的幅度。平均而言,在我们的样本期内,A 部分住院的向上编码每年为 6.56 亿美元(占 A 部分年度总支出的 0.53%),而 B 部分医生服务的向上编码每年为 23.8 亿美元(占 B 部分年度支出的 2.43%)。与这些数字相比,最近多个不同机构一致估计,医疗保险 C 部分的向上编码费用为每年 100-150 亿美元(约占 C 部分年度支出的 2.8-4.2%)。医疗保险 A 部分住院费用中的乱码支出相对于总体乱码支出而言较少。