Synergy - July/August 2012 - (Page 14)

industry feature Key Takeaways from CMS’ Revisions to Allow Flexibility and Eliminate Burdensome Conditions of Participation (CoPs) By Nancy Lian, CPCS, CPMSM, NAMSS Industry and Government Relations Chair K eeping up with the ever-changing regulations of regulatory agencies is an important part of any MSP’s job. The Industry & Government Relations Committee has worked with the NAMSS office and board to ensure that MSPs’ voices are heard when we see proposed rules and policy that affect their everyday duties. Our input on behalf of all our members is important, and we will continue to monitor the myriad changes we are all now experiencing. Will we always prevail? Probably not, but our organization is growing, and the agencies are listening to our feedback as they recognize the expertise NAMSS members possess. We all need to be vigilant to what is happening on our state and local levels, too. If you see or hear of potential legislation or regulation that you think deserves NAMSS’ input, please drop a note to the Industry & Government Relations Committee. You are our eyes and ears on the front lines — and together we can continue to make a difference. On May 16, 2012, in an effort to reduce burdensome and unnecessary rules and regulations, CMS issued changes to regulations pertaining to hospital conditions of participation (CoPs). Below you can review a summary of both the comments NAMSS conveyed in our December 2011 letter to CMS along with the CMS final rule. We are pleased that CMS recognizes the need for reform and has begun to take steps that will help facilitate more efficient and safe healthcare delivery. The rule is effective July 16, 2012. As with any change in regulations, MSPs should compare these revisions with their individual state requirements. traditionally been a part of the medical staff — in accordance with specific state scope of practice laws. • his would benefit hospitals in rural, T poor and underserved areas. • t would facilitate hospitals’ use of I telehealth services. ◾ CMS’ Final Rule – May 16, 2012 • ospitals have the flexibility to include H other practitioners as eligible candidates for the medical staff with privileges to practice in the hospital in accordance with state law. • ther practitioners (APRNs, PAs, O pharmacists) can perform all functions within their scope of practice, as defined by state law, and will function under the rules of the medical staff. • he medical staff must examine eligible T candidates’ (as defined by the governing body) credentials and recommend privileges for medical staff membership to the governing body. NAMSS Note: While medical staffs have retained the right to designate who is officially a “member” of the organized medical staff, the credentials and privileges of members and nonmembers alike must be reviewed by the medical staff and governing body. – his would help hospitals address T workplace shortages and provide more flexibility to critical access hospitals, small hospitals and hospitals in poor urban areas. ◾ CMS’ Final Rule – May 16, 2012 • ospitals now have the option of a H standalone nursing care plan or a single interdisciplinary care plan to address nursing and other disciplines. NAMSS Note: With the tidal wave move to electronic medical records and integration of care, this makes perfect sense! Single Governing Body for Multiple Hospitals ◾ NAMSS’ Comment – December 2011 • ne governing body in a multihospital O system does provide for economies of scale and is a reality in some systems. • MS must recognize local sub-boards’ C ability to enact policies and handle issues that directly contribute to sound patient care decision making, thus avoiding potential harmful delays due to distance and corporate bureaucracy. ◾ CMS’ Final Rule – May 16, 2012 • MS will allow one governing body C to oversee multiple hospitals in a multihospital system and have added a requirement for a member, or members, of the hospital’s medical staff to be included on the governing body as a means of ensuring communication and coordination between a single governing body and the medical staffs of individual hospitals in the system. ◾ CMS Addendum – In response to concerns issued by the American Hospital Association, CMS rescinded the provision APRN Privileging and Medical Staff Membership ◾ NAMSS’ Comment – December 2011 • MS should allow hospitals to C categorize APRNs as either medical staff or general hospital staff. H • ospitals should be enabled to privilege practitioners without making them members of the organized medical staff and to establish categories that define staff and nonstaff practitioners. The Role of Other Practitioners on the Medical Staff ◾ NAMSS’ Comment – December 2011 • MS should allow hospitals to grant C privileges to practitioners who have not 14 / SYNERGY july/a ugust 2012 

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Synergy - July/August 2012

Synergy - July/August 2012
Editor’s Column
President’s Column
Contracting 101, Part I
Key Takeaways from CMS ’ Revisions to Allow Flexibility and Eliminate Burdensome Conditions of Participation (CoPs)
ABMS Establishes Time Limits for Achieving Board Certification
Peer Review: Doing the Right Thing for the Right Reason
NCQA CVO Surveyor’s Point of View
Wyoming Association Takes Off with Expectations as High as the Tetons!
Synergy Product Guide
BYLAW BITS
NAMSS News
Happenings
Consultants Directory

Synergy - July/August 2012

https://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/NAMSS/synergy_20120809
https://www.nxtbookmedia.com