Coding and billing issues in the vascular laboratory.

Abstract

Noninvasive vascular testing grew from a need for a safe, accurate, and inexpensive alternative to contrast injection venography and arteriography. The ultrasound studies performed to evaluate vascular disease today meet all expectations for safety and accuracy, and cost thousands of dollars less than their contrast counterparts, yet few sectors in medicine have been challenged so regularly by the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA). Tests performed on duplex ultrasound instruments have prevented innumerable arterial and venous injuries and episodes of renal failure caused by contrast injection. Despite those laudable accomplishments, the financing agencies continue to reduce payments, threaten inappropriate supervisory requirements, and belittle the overall importance of the examinations. This report reviews the last decade of payment issues involving the vascular laboratory, pointing out inequities and problems that threaten not the quantity, but the quality, of this technology. The discussion focuses on Medicare Part B payments because they represent the majority of payments for noninvasive studies across the United States. The topics include payment denials, supervision issues, and problems associated with the zero work pool. In addition, the method by which HCFA calculates relative value unit (RVU) payments for procedures is included.