Home
gpo.gov
govinfo.gov

e-CFR Navigation Aids

Browse

Simple Search

Advanced Search

 — Boolean

 — Proximity

 

Search History

Search Tips

Corrections

Latest Updates

User Info

FAQs

Agency List

Incorporation By Reference

eCFR logo

Related Resources

Electronic Code of Federal Regulations

We invite you to try out our new beta eCFR site at https://ecfr.federalregister.gov. We???ve made big changes to make the eCFR easier to use. Be sure to leave feedback using the Help button on the bottom right of each page!

e-CFR data is current as of July 31, 2020

Title 42Chapter IVSubchapter FPart 476Subpart C → Subject Group


Title 42: Public Health
PART 476—QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ORGANIZATION REVIEW
Subpart C—Review Responsibilities of Quality Improvement Organizations (QIOs)


QIO Review Functions

§476.83   Initial denial determinations.

A determination by a QIO that the health care services furnished or proposed to be furnished to a patient are not medically necessary, are not reasonable, or are not at the appropriate level of care, is an initial denial determination and is appealable under part 473 of this chapter.

§476.84   Changes as a result of DRG validation.

A provider or practitioner may obtain a review by a QIO under part 473 of this chapter for changes in diagnostic and procedural coding that resulted in a change in DRG assignment as a result of QIO validation activities.

§476.85   Conclusive effect of QIO initial denial determinations and changes as a result of DRG validations.

A QIO initial denial determination or change as a result of DRG validation is final and binding unless, in accordance with the procedures in part 473—

(a) The initial denial determination is reconsidered and revised; or

(b) The change as a result of DRG validation is reviewed and revised.

§476.86   Correlation of Title XI functions with Title XVIII functions.

(a) Payment determinations. (1) QIO initial denial determinations under this part with regard to the reasonableness, medical necessity, and appropriateness of placement at an acute level of patient care as are also conclusive for payment purposes with regard to the following medical issues:

(i) Whether inpatient care furnished in a psychiatric hospital meets the requirements of §424.14 of this chapter.

(ii) Whether payment for inpatient hospital or SNF care beyond 20 consecutive days is precluded under §489.50 of this chapter because of failure to perform review of long-stay cases.

(iii) Whether the care furnished was custodial care or care not reasonable and necessary and, as such, excluded under §411.15(g) or §411.15(k) of this chapter.

(iv) Whether the care was appropriately furnished in the inpatient or outpatient setting.

(2) Reviews with respect to determinations listed in paragraph (a)(1) of this section must not be conducted, for purposes of payment, by Medicare administrative contractors, fiscal intermediaries, and carriers except as outlined in paragraph (c) of this section.

(3) QIOs make determinations as to the appropriateness of the location in which procedures are performed. A procedure may be medically necessary but denied if the QIO determines that it could, consistent with the provision of appropriate medical care, be effectively provided more economically on an outpatient basis or in an inpatient health care facility of a different type.

(4) QIO determinations as to whether the provider and the beneficiary knew or could reasonably be expected to have known that the services described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section were excluded are also conclusive for payment purposes.

(b) Utilization review activities. QIO review activities to determine whether inpatient hospital or SNF care services are reasonable and medically necessary and are furnished at the appropriate level of care fulfill the utilization review requirements set forth in §§405.1035, 405.1042, and 405.1137 of this chapter.

(c) Coverage. Nothing in paragraphs (a) (1) and (3) of this section will be construed as precluding CMS or a Medicare administrative contractor, fiscal intermediary, or carrier, in the proper exercise of its duties and functions, from reviewing claims to determine:

(1) In the case of items or services not reviewed by a QIO, whether they meet coverage requirements of Title XVIII relating to medical necessity, reasonableness, or appropriateness of placement at an acute level of patient care. However, if a coverage determination pertains to medical necessity, reasonableness, or appropriateness of placement at an acute level of patient care, the Medicare administrative contractor, fiscal intermediary, or carrier must use a QIO to make a determination on those issues if a QIO is conducting review in the area and must abide by the QIO's determination.

(2) Whether any claim meets coverage requirements of Title XVIII relating to issues other than medical necessity, reasonableness or appropriateness of placement at an acute level of patient care.

(d) Payment. Medicare administrative contractors, fiscal intermediaries, and carriers are not precluded from making payment determinations with regard to coverage determinations made under paragraph (c) of this section.

(e) Survey, compliance and assistance activities. QIO review and monitoring activities fulfill the requirements for compliance and assistance activities of State survey agencies under section 1864(a) with respect to sections 1861(e)(6), 1861(j)(8), 1861(j)(12), and 1861(k) of the Act, and activities required of Medicare administrative contractors, fiscal intermediaries, and carriers under §§421.100(d) and 421.200(f) of this chapter.

(f) Appeals. The requirements and procedures for QIO review of changes as a result of DRG validation and the reconsideration, hearing and judicial review of QIO initial denial determinations are set forth in part 478 of this chapter.

[50 FR 15330, Apr. 17, 1985; 50 FR 41886, Oct. 16, 1985, as amended at 53 FR 6648, Mar. 2, 1988. Redesignated at 64 FR 66279, Nov. 24, 1999; 77 FR 68561, Nov. 15, 2012]

§476.88   Examination of the operations and records of health care facilities and practitioners.

(a) Authorization to examine records. A facility claiming Medicare payment must permit a QIO or its subcontractor to examine its operation and records (including information on charges) that are pertinent to health care services furnished to Medicare beneficiaries and are necessary for the QIO or its subcontractor to—

(1) Perform review functions including, but not limited to—

(i) DRG validation;

(ii) Outlier review in facilities under a prospective payment system; and

(iii) Implementation of corrective action and fraud and abuse prevention activities;

(2) Evaluate cases that have been identified as deviating from the QIO norms and criteria, or standards; and

(3) Evaluate the capability of the facility to perform quality review functions under a subcontract with the QIO.

(b) Limitations on access to records. A QIO has access to the records of non-Medicare patients if—

(1) The records relate to review performed under a non-Medicare QIO contract and if authorized by those patients in accordance with State law; or

(2) The QIO needs the records to perform its quality review responsibilities under the Act and receives authorization from the facility or practitioner.

(c) Conditions of examination. When examining a facility's operation or records the QIO must—

(1) Examine only those operations and records (including information on charges) required to fulfill the purposes of paragraph (a) of this section;

(2) Cooperate with agencies responsible for other examination functions under Federal or Federally assisted programs in order to minimize duplication of effort;

(3) Conduct the examinations during reasonable hours; and

(4) Maintain in its principal office written records of the results of the examination of the facility.

§476.90   Lack of cooperation by a provider or practitioner.

(a) If a provider or practitioner refuses to allow a QIO to enter and perform the duties and functions required under its contract with CMS, the QIO may—

(1) Determine that the provider or practitioner has failed to comply with the requirements of 42 CFR 1004.10(c) and report the matter to the HHS Inspector General; or

(2) Issue initial denial determinations for those claims it is unable to review, make the determination that financial liability will be assigned to the provider or practitioner, and may report the matter to the HHS Inspector General.

(b) If a QIO gives a provider or practitioner sufficient notice and a reasonable amount of time to respond to a request for information about a claim, and if the provider or practitioner does not respond in a timely manner, the QIO will deny the claim. A provider or practitioner may request that the QIO reconsider its decision to deny the claim. No further appeal rights are available.

[77 FR 53683, Aug. 31, 2012]

§476.93   Opportunity to discuss proposed initial denial determination and changes as a result of a DRG validation.

Before a QIO reaches an initial denial determination or makes a change as a result of a DRG validation, it must—

(a) Promptly notify the provider or supplier and the patient's attending physician (or other attending health care practitioner) of the proposed determination or DRG change; and

(b) Afford an opportunity for the provider or supplier and the physician (or other attending health care practitioner) to discuss the matter with the QIO physician advisor and to explain the nature of the patient's need for health care services, including all factors which preclude treatment of the patient as an outpatient or in an alternative level of inpatient care.

§476.94   Notice of QIO initial denial determination and changes as a result of a DRG validation.

(a) Notice of initial denial determination—(1) Parties to be notified. A QIO must provide written notice of an initial denial determination to—

(i) The patient, or if the patient is expected to be unable to comprehend the notice, the patient's next of kin, guardian or other representative or sponsor;

(ii) The attending physician, or other attending health care practitioner;

(iii) The facility; and

(iv) The Medicare administrative contractor, fiscal intermediary, or carrier.

(2) Timing of the notice. The notice must be delivered to beneficiaries in the facility or mailed to those no longer in the facility, within the following time periods—

(i) For admission, on the first working day after the initial denial determination;

(ii) For continued stay (e.g., outliers in facilities under a prospective payment system), by the first working day after the initial denial determination if the beneficiary is still in the facility, and within 3 working days if the beneficiary has been discharged;

(iii) For preprocedure review, before the procedure is performed;

(iv) For preadmission review, before admission;

(v) If identification as a Medicare program patient has been delayed, within three working days of identification;

(vi) For retrospective review, (excluding DRG validation and post procedure review), within 3 working days of the initial denial determination; and

(vii) For post-procedure review, within 3 working days of the initial denial determination.

(3) Preadmission review. In the case of preadmission review, the QIO must document that the patient and the facility received notice of the initial denial determination.

(b) Notice of changes as a result of a DRG validation. The QIO must notify the provider and practitioner of changes to procedural and diagnostic information that result in a change of DRG assignment, within 30 days of the QIO's decision.

(c) Content of the notice. The notice must be understandable and written in plain English and must contain—

(1) The reason for the initial denial determination or change as a result of the DRG validation;

(2) For day outliers in hospitals, the date on which the stay or services in the facility will not be approved as being reasonable and medically necessary or appropriate to the patients' health care needs;

(3) A statement informing each party or his or her representative of the right to request in accordance with the provisions of part 478, subpart B of this chapter—

(i) Review of a change resulting from DRG validation; or

(ii) Reconsideration of the initial denial determination;

(4) The locations for filing a request for reconsideration or review and the time period within which a request must be filed;

(5) A statement about who is liable for payment of the denied services under section 1879 of the Act; and

(6) A statement concerning the duties and functions of the QIO under the Act.

(d) Notice to payers. The QIO must provide prompt written notice of an initial denial determination or changes as a result of a DRG validation to the Medicare administrative contractor, fiscal intermediary, or carrier within the same time periods as the notices to the other parties.

(e) Record of initial denial determination and changes as a result of a DRG validation. (1) The QIO must document and preserve a record of all initial denial determinations and changes as a result of DRG validations for six years from the date the services in question were provided.

(2) The documentary record must include—

(i) The detailed basis for the initial denial determination or changes as a result of a DRG validation; and

(ii) A copy of the determination or change in DRG notices sent to all parties and identification of each party and the date on which the notice was mailed or delivered.

[50 FR 15330, Apr. 17, 1985, as amended at 77 FR 68561, Nov. 15, 2012]

§476.96   Review period and reopening of initial denial determinations and changes as a result of DRG validations.

(a) General timeframe. A QIO or its subcontractor—

(1) Within one year of the date of the claim containing the service in question, may review and deny payment; and

(2) Within one year of the date of its decision, may reopen an initial denial determination or a change as a result of a DRG validation.

(b) Extended timeframes. (1) An initial denial determination or change as a result of a DRG validation may be made after one year but within four years of the date of the claim containing the service in question, if CMS approves.

(2) A reopening of an initial denial determination or change as a result of a DRG validation may be made after one year but within four years of the date of the QIO's decision if—

(i) Additional information is received on the patient's condition;

(ii) Reviewer error occurred in interpretation or application of Medicare coverage policy or review criteria;

(iii) There is an error apparent on the face of the evidence upon which the initial denial or DRG validation was based; or

(iv) There is a clerical error in the statement of the initial denial determination or change as a result of a DRG validation.

(c) Fraud and abuse. (1) A QIO or its subcontractor may review and deny payment anytime there is a finding that the claim for service involves fraud or a similar abusive practice that does not support a finding of fraud.

(2) An initial denial determination or change as a result of a DRG validation may be reopened and revised anytime there is a finding that it was obtained through fraud or a similar abusive practice that does not support a finding of fraud.

§476.98   Reviewer qualifications and participation.

(a) Peer review by physician. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, each person who makes an initial denial determination about services furnished or proposed to be furnished by a licensed doctor of medicine or osteopathy or by a doctor of dentistry must be respectively another licensed doctor of medicine or osteopathy or of dentistry in the QIO area.

(2) If a QIO determines that peers are not available to make initial denial determinations, a doctor of medicine or osteopathy may make denial determinations for services ordered or performed by a doctor in any of the three specialties.

(3) For purposes of paragraph (a)(1) of this section, individuals authorized to practice medicine in American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands as “medical officers” may make determinations on care ordered or furnished by their peers but not on care ordered or furnished by licensed doctors of medicine or osteopathy.

(b) Peer review by health care practitioners other than physicians. Health care practitioners other than physicians may review services furnished by other practitioners in the same professional field.

(c) DRG validation review. Decisions about procedural and diagnostic information must be made by physicians. Technical coding issues must be reviewed by individuals with training and experience in ICD-9-CM coding.

(d) Persons excluded from review. (1) A person may not review health care services or make initial denial determinations or changes as a result of DRG validations if he or she, or a member of his or her family—

(i) Participated in developing or executing the beneficiary's treatment plan;

(ii) Is a member of the beneficiary's family; or

(iii) Is a governing body member, officer, partner, 5 percent or more owner, or managing employee in the health care facility where the services were or are to be furnished.

(2) A member of a reviewer's family is a spouse (other than a spouse who is legally separated under a decree of divorce or separate maintenance), child (including a legally adopted child), grandchild, parent, or grandparent.

[50 FR 15330, Apr. 17, 1985, as amended at 77 FR 68561, Nov. 15, 2012]

§476.100   Use of norms and criteria.

(a) Use of norms. As specified in its contract, a QIO must use national, or where appropriate, regional norms in conducting review to achieve QIO contract objectives. However, with regard to determining the number of procedures selected for preadmission review, a QIO must use national admission norms.

(b) Use of criteria. In assessing the need for and appropriateness of an inpatient health care facility stay, a QIO must apply criteria to determine—

(1) The necessity for facility admission and continued stay (in cases of day outliers in hospitals under prospective payment);

(2) The necessity for surgery and other invasive diagnostic and therapeutic procedures; or

(3) The appropriateness of providing services at a particular health care facility or at a particular level of care. The QIO must determine whether the beneficiary requires the level of care received or whether a lower and less costly level of care would be equally effective.

(c) Establishment of criteria and standards. For the conduct of review a QIO must—

(1) Establish written criteria based upon typical patterns of practice in the QIO area, or use national criteria where appropriate; and

(2) Establish written criteria and standards to be used in conducting quality review studies.

(d) Variant criteria and standards. A QIO may establish specific criteria and standards to be applied to certain locations and facilities in the QIO area if the QIO determines that—

(1) The patterns of practice in those locations and facilities are substantially different from patterns in the remainder of the QIO area; and

(2) There is a reasonable basis for the difference which makes the variation appropriate.

§476.102   Involvement of health care practitioners other than physicians.

(a) Basic requirement. Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, a QIO must meet the following requirements:

(1) Consult with the peers of the practitioners who furnish the services under review if the QIO reviews care and services delivered by health care practitioners other than physicians.

(2) Assure that in determinations regarding medical necessity of services or the quality of the services they furnish, these practitioners are involved in—

(i) Developing QIO criteria and standards;

(ii) Selecting norms to be used; and

(iii) Developing review mechanisms for care furnished by their peers.

(3) Ensure that an initial denial determination or a change as a result of DRG validation of services provided by a health care practitioner other than a physician is made by a physician only after consultation with a peer of that practitioner. Initial denial determinations and changes as a result of DRG validations must be made only by a physician or dentist.

(b) Exception. The requirements of paragraph (a) of this section do not apply if—

(1) The QIO has been unable to obtain a roster of peer practitioners available to perform review; or

(2) The practitioners are precluded from performing review because they participated in the treatment of the patient, the patient is a relative, or the practitioners have a financial interest in the health care facility as described in §466.98(d).

(c) Peer involvement in quality review studies. Practitioners must be involved in the design of quality review studies, development of criteria, and actual conduct of studies involving their peers.

(d) Consultation with practitioners other than physicians. To the extent practicable, a QIO must consult with nurses and other professional health care practitioners (other than physicians defined in 1861(r) (1) and (2) of the Act) and with representatives of institutional and noninstitutional providers and suppliers with respect to the QIO's responsibility for review.

[50 FR 15330, Apr. 17, 1985; 50 FR 41886, Oct. 16, 1985. Redesignated at 64 FR 66279, Nov. 24, 1999]

§476.104   Coordination of activities.

In order to achieve efficient and economical review, a QIO must coordinate its activities (including information exchanges) with the activities of—

(a) Medicare administrative contractors, fiscal intermediaries, and carriers.

(b) Other QIOs; and

(c) Other public or private review organizations as may be appropriate.

[50 FR 15330, Apr. 17, 1985, as amended at 77 FR 68561, Nov. 15, 2012]

§476.110   Use of immediate advocacy to resolve oral beneficiary complaints.

(a) Immediate advocacy. A QIO may offer the option of resolving an oral complaint through the use of immediate advocacy if:

(1) The complaint is received not later than 6 months from the date on which the care giving rise to the complaint occurred.

(2) After initial screening of the complaint, the QIO makes a preliminary determination that—

(i) The complaint is unrelated to the clinical quality of health care itself but relates to items or services that accompany or are incidental to the medical care and are provided by a practitioner and/or provider; or

(ii) The complaint, while related to the clinical quality of health care received by the beneficiary, does not rise to the level of being a gross and flagrant, substantial, or significant quality of care concern.

(3) The beneficiary agrees to the disclosure of his or her name to the involved provider and/or practitioner.

(4) All parties orally consent to the use of immediate advocacy.

(5) All parties agree to the limitations on redisclosure set forth in §480.107 of this subchapter.

(b) Discontinuation of immediate advocacy. The QIO or either party may discontinue participation in immediate advocacy at any time.

(1) The QIO must inform the parties that immediate advocacy will be discontinued; and

(2) The beneficiary must be informed of his or her right to submit a written complaint in accordance with the procedures in §476.120.

(c) Confidentiality requirements. All communications, written and oral, exchanged during the immediate advocacy process must not be redisclosed without the written consent of all parties.

(d) Abandoned complaints. If any party fails to participate or otherwise comply with the requirements of the immediate advocacy process, the QIO may determine that the complaint has been abandoned and—

(1) Inform the parties that immediate advocacy will be discontinued; and

(2) Inform the Medicare beneficiary of his or her right to submit a written complaint in accordance with the procedures in §476.120.

[77 FR 68561, Nov. 15, 2012]

§476.120   Submission of written beneficiary complaints.

(a) Timeframe for submission of written complaints. A QIO shall be responsible for conducting a review of any written complaint received from a Medicare beneficiary or a Medicare beneficiary's representative about the quality of health care if the complaint is received not later than 3 years from the date on which the care giving rise to the complaint occurred.

(1) A written complaint includes a complaint submitted electronically to the QIO.

(2) In those instances where a Medicare beneficiary contacts the QIO regarding a complaint but declines to submit the complaint in writing and immediate advocacy has not been offered, the QIO may complete a general quality of care review in accordance with §476.160 if the QIO makes a preliminary determination that the complaint involves a potential gross and flagrant, substantial or significant quality of care concern.

(b) New concerns raised by a Medicare beneficiary. If a Medicare beneficiary raises new concerns relating to the same complaint after the completion of the interim initial determination in §476.130(c), the concerns will be processed as a new complaint. The QIO may process new concerns raised after the receipt of the written complaint as part of the same complaint, provided they are received prior to the completion of the interim initial determination. Even if a concern is received before the interim initial determination, the QIO can address it as a separate complaint if the QIO determines that this is warranted by the circumstances.

[77 FR 68561, Nov. 15, 2012]

§476.130   Beneficiary complaint review procedures.

(a) Scope of the QIO review. In completing its review, the QIO shall consider any information and materials submitted by the Medicare beneficiary or his or her representative and any information submitted by the provider and/or practitioner. All information obtained by the QIO that fits within the definition of “confidential information” under §480.101, will be held by the QIO as confidential.

(1) The QIO's review will focus on the episode of care from which the complaint arose and address the specific concerns identified by the beneficiary and any additional concerns identified by the QIO. The QIO may separate concerns into different complaints if the QIO determine that the concerns relate to different episodes of care.

(2) The QIO will use evidence-based standards of care to the maximum extent practicable. If no standard of care exists, the QIO will use available norms, best practices and established guidelines to establish the standard that will be used in completing the review. The QIO's determination regarding the standard used is not subject to appeal.

(b) Medical information requests. (1) Upon request by the QIO, a provider or practitioner must deliver all medical information requested in response to a Medicare beneficiary complaint within 14 calendar days of the request. A QIO is authorized to require the receipt of the medical information sooner if the QIO make a preliminary determination that the complaint involves a potential gross and flagrant or substantial quality of care concern as specified in part 1004 of this title and circumstances warrant earlier receipt of the medical information. A practitioner's or provider's failure to comply with the request for medical information within the established timeframe may result in the QIO taking action in accordance with §476.90.

(2) In requesting medical information in response to a Medicare beneficiary complaint, the QIO must notify the practitioner and/or provider that the medical record is being requested in response to a beneficiary complaint, explain the practitioner's and/or provider's right to discuss the QIO's interim initial determination, and request the name of a contact person in order to ensure timely completion of the discussion.

(c) Interim initial determination. The QIO peer reviewer will complete the review and the practitioner and/or provider will be notified of the interim initial determination within 10 calendar days of the receipt of all medical information.

(1) A practitioner and provider will be notified by telephone of the opportunity to discuss the QIO's interim initial determination with the QIO in those situations where the peer reviewer determines that the quality of services does not meet professionally recognized standards of care for any concern in the complaint. The discussion must be held no later than 7 calendar days from the date of the initial offer.

(2) The interim initial determination becomes the final initial determination if the discussion is not completed timely as a result of the practitioner's and/or provider's failure to respond.

(3) Written statements in lieu of a discussion must be received no later than 7 calendar days from the date of the initial offer.

(4) In rare circumstances, the QIO may grant additional time to complete the discussion or submission of a written statement in lieu of a discussion.

(d) Final initial determination. The QIO must issue written notification of its final initial determination in those cases in which the QIO has determined that care met professionally recognized standards, as well as in those cases in which the QIO determined that standards were not met and the opportunity for discussion has been completed.

(1) No later than 3 business days after completion of its review, or for cases in which the standard was not met, no later than 3 business days after the discussion or receipt of the provider's and/or practitioner's written statement, the QIO will notify (by telephone) the beneficiary and the provider/practitioner of its final initial determination and of the right to request a reconsideration of the QIO's final initial determination.

(2) Written notice of the QIO's final initial determination will be forwarded to all parties within 5 calendar days after completion of its review, and must include:

(i) A statement for each concern that care did or did not meet the standard of care;

(ii) The standard identified by the QIO for each of the concerns; and

(iii) A summary of the specific facts that the QIO determines are pertinent to its findings, including references to medical information and, if held, the discussion with the involved practitioner and/or provider.

[77 FR 68561, Nov. 15, 2012]

§476.140   Beneficiary complaint reconsideration procedures.

(a) Right to request a reconsideration. Beginning with complaints filed after July 31, 2014, a Medicare beneficiary, a provider, or a practitioner who is dissatisfied with a QIO's final initial determination may request a reconsideration by the QIO.

(1) The reconsideration request must be received by the QIO, in writing or by telephone, no later than 3 calendar days following initial notification of the QIO's determination. If the QIO is unable to accept a request, the request must be submitted by noon of the next day the QIO is available to accept a request.

(2) The Medicare beneficiary, or his or her representative, and the practitioner and/or provider must be available to answer any questions or supply any information that the QIO requests in order to conduct its reconsideration.

(3) The QIO must offer the Medicare beneficiary and the practitioner and/or provider an opportunity to provide further information. A Medicare beneficiary, a practitioner, and a provider may, but are not required to, submit evidence to be considered by the QIO in making its reconsideration decision.

(b) Issuance of the QIO's final decision. No later than 5 calendar days after receipt of the request for a reconsideration, or, if later, 5 calendar days after receiving any medical or other records needed for such reconsideration, the QIO must complete the review and notify the beneficiary and the practitioner/provider of its decision.

(1) The QIO's initial notification may be done by telephone, followed by the mailing of a written notice by noon of the next calendar day that includes—

(i) A statement for each concern that care did or did not meet the standard of care;

(ii) The standard identified by the QIO for each of the concerns;

(iii) A summary of the specific facts that the QIO determines are pertinent to its findings; and

(iv) A statement that the letter represents the QIO's final determination and that there is no right to further appeal.

(2) The QIO may provide information to the beneficiary, practitioner, and provider regarding opportunities for improving the care given to patients based on the specific findings of its review and the development of quality improvement initiatives.

[77 FR 68561, Nov. 15, 2012]

§476.150   Abandoned complaints and reopening rights.

(a) Abandoned complaints. If a Medicare beneficiary fails to participate or otherwise comply with the requirements of the beneficiary complaint review process and the QIO does not have sufficient information to complete its review, the QIO may determine that the complaint has been abandoned and—

(1) Inform the parties that its complaint review will be discontinued; and

(2) Inform the beneficiary of his or her right to resubmit a written complaint in accordance with the procedures in §476.120.

(b) Reopening complaint reviews. A QIO may reopen a Medicare beneficiary complaint review using the same procedures that the QIO would use for reopening initial denial determinations and changes as a result of DRG validation, as described in §476.96.

[77 FR 68561, Nov. 15, 2012]

§476.160   General quality of care review procedures.

(a) Scope of the QIO review. A QIO may conduct a general quality of care review in accordance with section 1154(a)(1)(B) of the Act.

(1) A QIO may conduct general quality of care reviews based on—

(i) Concerns identified during the course of other QIO review activities;

(ii) Referrals from other sources, including but not limited to individuals, contractors, other Federal or State agencies; or

(iii) Analysis of data.

(2) The QIO's review will focus on all concerns identified by the QIO and/or identified by those who have referred or reported the concerns, with consideration being given to the episode of care related to the concerns.

(3) The QIO will use evidence-based standards of care to the maximum extent practicable. If no standard of care exists, the QIO must use available norms, best practices, and established guidelines to establish the standard that will be used in completing the review. The QIO's determination regarding the standard used is not subject to appeal.

(b) Medical information requests. Upon request by the QIO, a provider or practitioner must deliver all medical information requested within 14 calendar days of the request. A QIO is authorized to require the receipt of the medical information sooner if the QIO makes a preliminary determination that the review involves a potential gross and flagrant or substantial quality of care concern and circumstances warrant earlier receipt of the medical information. A practitioner's or provider's failure to comply with the request for medical information within the established timeframe may result in the QIO taking action in accordance with §476.90.

(c) Initial determination. The QIO peer reviewer will complete the review and the practitioner and/or provider will be notified of the initial determination in writing within 10 calendar days of the receipt of all medical information.

[77 FR 68561, Nov. 15, 2012]

§476.170   General quality of care reconsideration procedures.

(a) Right to request a reconsideration. Beginning with reviews initiated after July 31, 2014, a provider or practitioner who is dissatisfied with a QIO's initial determination may request a reconsideration by the QIO.

(1) The reconsideration request must be received by the QIO, in writing or by telephone, by no later than 3 calendar days following receipt of the QIO's initial determination. If the QIO is unable to accept the request, the request must be submitted by noon of the next day the QIO is available to accept a request.

(2) The practitioner or provider must be available to answer any questions or supply any information that the QIO requests in order to conduct its reconsideration.

(3) The QIO must offer the practitioner or provider an opportunity to provide further information. A practitioner or provider may, but is not required to, submit evidence to be considered by the QIO in making its reconsideration decision.

(b) Issuance of the QIO's final decision. No later than 5 calendar days after receipt of the request for a reconsideration, or, if later, 5 calendar days after receiving any medical or other records needed for such reconsideration, the QIO must complete the review and notify the practitioner or provider of its decision.

(1) The QIO's initial notification may be done by telephone, followed by the mailing of a written notice by noon the next calendar day that includes:

(i) A statement for each concern that care did or did not meet the standard of care;

(ii) The standard identified by the QIO for each of the concerns;

(iii) A summary of the specific facts that the QIO determines are pertinent to its findings; and

(iv) A statement that the letter represents the QIO's final determination and that there is no right to further appeal.

(2) The QIO may provide information regarding opportunities for improving the care given to patients based on the specific findings of its review.

[77 FR 68561, Nov. 15, 2012]

Need assistance?