Scholarship table
Do you suppose the soaking midwest rains and Tropical Storm Arthur are just God's way of saying get your butts back inside?
I am trying to ask an honest question, so please don't flame me. I haven't seen it asked anywhere on this board.Given that the federal government is providing special funds to care for Covid-19 patients, wouldn't that incentivize healthcare providers to rule an illness or death as Covid-related if the opportunity presents itself, especially if that patient is uninsured?
Correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand it hospitals are getting paid more for the additional expense of COVID-positive cases, however there is no additional payment for a deceased person based on a COVID diagnosis. In other words, there is no financial incentive to list the cause of death as COVID-19, correct?
It is a possibility...but the False Claims Act provides significant disincentives, like up to 3x the damages, plus an additional $5-10K for each false claim, exclusion from participation in federal programs (like Medicare) and a whole bunch of headaches for the legal department.And whistleblowers can report possible violations and share in a significant portion of the damages, so it can be pretty difficult even for unethical providers to hide truly false submissions.
But if you don't test them, and they just "thought" it was Covid, how could you prove intent? I am not necessarily talking about outright fraud; I am talking about giving the benefit of the doubt to the diagnosis that pays more.
FCA violations don't require fraudulent intent; they just require knowing or reckless disregard for the accuracy of the claim. That requires providers to stay up to date on what CMS has said regarding how to submit claims.Still, you are correct - if a provider who understands the law bills a '50-50 case' as COVID, it would be difficult for the government to prove it was a false claim.
Seems like people intrigued about incorrectly identified COVID cases (fraud or not). Seems like it isn't that complex as per an earlier post I made.Take the total US deaths in March-April-May (when it finishes) for 2019. Take the same number for 2020. Chances are the increase in deaths should be pretty close to what COVID deaths are reported. Then you probably can take that additional death number and divide it by approx 1.8% (death rate) and that is how many cases we probably really had.I would be shocked if calculated numbers will not be higher than the reported ones. Chances are we are both under-reporting deaths and cases. Unless someone can explain why the numbers of deaths would increase from 2019 to 2020 (other than some population growth perhaps?) this seems like a reasonable way to verify the numbers.
(1) My wife is an outpatient PT in a hospital and during the pandemic has had to work regular shifts as well as in-patient for non-Covid folks and as a PPE observer(get the nurses/docs dressed and undressed as the come in and out of the Covid rooms). 3 weeks ago she was working a weekend in patient shift (basically go to the admitted patients rooms try to get them to walk, use the bathroom, etc) and had a patient that had just come in from a nurse home, one they've had a number of times because hes all f'd up but nothing to do with Covid symptoms. She went in, did her treatment stuff then left. Then the following Tuesday she was working Covid ICU and saw the patient in there from Saturday. Turns out he had tested positive for Covid but was asymptomatic, and this do had all the comorbids you could imagine but was asymptomatic. He died 48 hours later, but was listed as a Covid death.(2) That kind of story shouldn't happen anymore as there is now plenty of testing that anyone admitted gets tested, but the hospital is taking in a lot of nursing home patients that in ordinary times they would turn away. They are Covid postive for the most part, but a fair number are asymptomatic(at least 50%) as well. So those patients are being charged out as Covid without necessarily getting the full gamut of treatment(though they are taking up ICU beds).
If only there were some sort of umbrella organization that could establish reporting standards for all the states so that we could get a clear understanding of the death toll.
https://coloradosun.com/2020/05/15/colorado-coronavirus-death-certificate/ and smith, you can go suck it!!
What I marked as (1) and (2) above for easy reference are very different cases, with very different purposes though, right? In (1) listing that as a covid death may throw off the statistics, but there is no financial incentive to doing so if, as TSmith said below, hospitals aren't being reimbursed at higher rates for covid deaths post mortem. From a billing standpoint, however, asymptomatic cases should be reimbursed at higher rates because they require the same precautions, PPE, etc., as symptomatic cases, correct? So if there is a standard reimbursement bump for covid cases, it shouldn't really matter if they are symptomatic. The bump isn't for the amount of care required, because medication, respirators, etc., are all coded and reimbursed on their previously established schedules anyway. So that would already be accounted for. The bump is for the strain on the hospital to prevent spread?
More doctor views banned by Youtube. This time epidemiologist is banned. Early we were told to listen to doctors, then we were told not any old doctors but epidemiologists. Now we are told only some epidemiologists can be heard.Have people not learned their history for examples when conventional wisdom called the minority group crazy and they turned out right?What is with YouTube deciding who is right or wrong here? Maddening and the gov’t should regulate these digital behemoths.
What is with YouTube deciding who is right or wrong here? Maddening and the gov’t should regulate these digital behemoths.
So the answer to Chick’s question is a qualified “yes”.