Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

shraby

(21,946 posts)
Tue Mar 18, 2014, 12:19 PM Mar 2014

Medicare change.."under observation"..does anyone know

anything about this claim? I got it in an email.

"I saw this on NBC News last night and thought I should send it to all my friends on Medicare as fair warning. I've included the segment for you to view. Basically, if I understand it correctly, do not let the hospital admit you with the words, "Under Observation." Insist on "In-Patient"designation. Otherwise, you will be responsible for the hospital expenses. It might be wise to inform family members too."

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Medicare change.."under observation"..does anyone know (Original Post) shraby Mar 2014 OP
I believe that it's true, according to several articles, including AARP. SharonAnn Mar 2014 #1
I would think then that a hospital would automatically check a person in as a patient shraby Mar 2014 #2
I saw a news report on it some time ago. Motown_Johnny Mar 2014 #3
I am on Medicare and have not heard of this, RebelOne Mar 2014 #4
AKA 2 midnight rule. Link that explains some of it. Blue Diadem Mar 2014 #5

SharonAnn

(13,777 posts)
1. I believe that it's true, according to several articles, including AARP.
Tue Mar 18, 2014, 12:21 PM
Mar 2014

"Under observation" is not a Medicare approved designation as I understand it. Therefore, Medicare doesn't pay any of the costs associated with the hospital stay.

shraby

(21,946 posts)
2. I would think then that a hospital would automatically check a person in as a patient
Tue Mar 18, 2014, 12:25 PM
Mar 2014

to optimize their bottom line. If under observation would jeopardize them getting the bill paid, I don't see them doing that.

 

Motown_Johnny

(22,308 posts)
3. I saw a news report on it some time ago.
Tue Mar 18, 2014, 12:47 PM
Mar 2014


It looks like a way to screw people.


Why the hell Medicare would not cover people who are under observation is beyond me. You would think it would be a way to reduce costs instead of making people be admitted.


You should inform everyone you can. Also check on them if something happens to them. This is exactly the kind of detail you forget about when you are worried about your loved one.



Blue Diadem

(6,597 posts)
5. AKA 2 midnight rule. Link that explains some of it.
Tue Mar 18, 2014, 01:10 PM
Mar 2014
http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20140203/NEWS/302039975

snip:
Hospitals say they'll lose money on the deal because many procedures are appropriate for short inpatient care and now will be reimbursed only under Medicare's lower outpatient rates.

CMS officials say hospitals actually stand to benefit financially because the two-midnight rule also says hospital visits that cross two midnights will be presumed legitimate if they include adequate physician notes. That should allow hospitals to get full inpatient rates on cases that would have been outpatient in the past, creating an estimated $220 million in new Medicare expenses nationwide, the agency estimated.

The CMS devised the policy in response to complaints that Medicare patients were being exposed to prolonged periods of outpatient observation care in the hospital—which exposes them to 20% co-payments and denies them eligibility for Medicare-covered rehab care upon release.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Medicare change.."un...