ENTtoday
  • Home
  • COVID-19
  • Practice Focus
    • Allergy
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Departments
    • Issue Archive
    • TRIO Best Practices
      • Allergy
      • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
      • Head and Neck
      • Laryngology
      • Otology/Neurotology
      • Pediatric
      • Rhinology
      • Sleep Medicine
    • Career Development
    • Case of the Month
    • Everyday Ethics
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Medical Education
    • Online Exclusives
    • Practice Management
    • Resident Focus
    • Rx: Wellness
    • Special Reports
    • Tech Talk
    • Viewpoint
    • What’s Your O.R. Playlist?
  • Literature Reviews
    • Allergy
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Events
    • Featured Events
    • TRIO Meetings
  • Contact Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Triological Society
    • Advertising Staff
    • Subscribe
  • Advertise
    • Place an Ad
    • Classifieds
    • Rate Card
  • Search

No Surprises Act Rules: Updates and Future Considerations

by Emily A. Johnson, JD • January 14, 2022

  • Tweet
  • Email
Print-Friendly Version

Last month, we discussed the Hospital Price Transparency rule, which requires hospitals to publish their standard charges for certain items and services in accordance with the guidelines published by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). This month, we’ll look at the No Surprises Act, which stipulates that healthcare insurers may not surprise patients with out-of-network care bills, instead requiring healthcare providers and insurers to broker a price compromise between themselves.

You Might Also Like

No related posts.

Explore This Issue
January 2022

The No Surprises Act, enacted on a bipartisan basis in December 2020, protects patients from surprise billing from out-of-network providers for nonemergency services, out-of-network ambulance services, and certain emergency services. According to the United States Secretary of Labor, the purpose of the No Surprises Act and Parts I and II of the act’s interim final rules is to ensure that surprise billing isn’t a barrier to receiving medical care.  In addition, the No Surprises Act and its interim final rules provide a dispute resolution framework for providers to resolve disputes regarding out-of-network rates.

No Surprises Act Overview

Part I of the interim final rules, released in July 2021, requires in-network pricing coverage for emergency and post-stabilization services rendered by out-of-network providers at participating healthcare facilities. Further, the rules obligate providers to give notice and receive patient consent prior to participating in balance billing and cost-sharing practices that exceed in-network cost-sharing amounts. The rules also establish disclosure requirements for providers related to the cost of services, procedures related to obtaining patient consent for certain billing practices, and a means by which patients can submit complaints for violations of the act.

Part II of the interim final rules, released in September 2021, furthers the goals of Part I by specifying the independent dispute resolution framework, establishing good faith cost estimate requirements in connection with self-pay patients, and forms an external review provision for the No Surprises Act.

Together, these rules seek to establish a framework that a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) memo released in September 2021 states will equate to “new protections from surprise billing and excessive cost-sharing for consumers receiving healthcare items/services.”

In addition to Parts I and II of the interim final rules, a notice of proposed rulemaking was released in September 2021 that proposes the following:

  • New reporting requirements regarding air ambulance services.
  • New disclosures and reporting requirements regarding agent and broker compensation.
  • New procedures for enforcement of Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) provisions against providers, healthcare facilities, and providers of air ambulance services.
  • New disclosure and reporting requirements applicable to issuers of individual health insurance coverage and short-term, limited-duration insurance regarding agent and broker compensation.
  • Revisions to existing PHS Act enforcement procedures for plans and issuers.

Independent Dispute Resolution

As highlighted in the CMS memo, one of the key aspects of the interim final rules is the strengthening of independent dispute resolution (IDR) procedures and timeframes. The memo states that “The Sept. 30, 2021, rule establishes the federal independent dispute resolution process that out-of-network providers, facilities, providers of air ambulance services, plans, and issuers in the group and individual markets may use to determine the out-of-network rate for applicable items or services after an unsuccessful open negotiation. Not all items and services are eligible for the federal independent dispute resolution process.”

The framework establishes the procedures and timeframes for providers and insurers to settle negotiations regarding out-of-network rates when state law doesn’t exist to govern dispute resolution procedures.

Pages: 1 2 3 | Single Page

Filed Under: Departments, Legal Matters Tagged With: Billing, clinical costsIssue: January 2022

You Might Also Like:

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

The Laryngoscope
Ensure you have all the latest research at your fingertips; Subscribe to The Laryngoscope today!

Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
Open access journal in otolaryngology – head and neck surgery is currently accepting submissions.

Classifieds

View the classified ads »

TRIO Best Practices

View the TRIO Best Practices »

Top Articles for Residents

  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Why More MDs, Medical Residents Are Choosing to Pursue Additional Academic Degrees
  • What Physicians Need to Know about Investing Before Hiring a Financial Advisor
  • Tips to Help You Regain Your Sense of Self
  • Should USMLE Step 1 Change from Numeric Score to Pass/Fail?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?
    • Neurogenic Cough Is Often a Diagnosis of Exclusion
    • What Happens to Medical Students Who Don’t Match?
    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name
    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment
    • What Happens to Medical Students Who Don’t Match?
    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?
    • Vertigo in the Elderly: What Does It Mean?
    • Neurogenic Cough Is Often a Diagnosis of Exclusion
    • Why We Get Colds
    • Are the Jobs in Healthcare Good Jobs?
    • What Really Works in Functional Rhinoplasty?
    • Is the Best Modality to Assess Vocal Fold Mobility in Children Flexible Fiberoptic Laryngoscopy or Ultrasound?
    • Three Primary Treatment Strategies Show No Differences in Swallow Outcome for Patients with Low- to Intermediate-Risk Tonsil Cancer

Polls

Do you have physician assistants in your otolaryngology practice?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive
  • Home
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookie Preferences

Visit: The Triological Society • The Laryngoscope • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology

Wiley
© 2023 The Triological Society. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN 1559-4939