The post concerned an amicus brief the AMA filed in the case Peters v. Aetna. In the brief, the AMA said the 4th District Court of Appeals in Virginia should overturn a previous judgment that denied the companies’ liability in passing administrative charges through CPT codes.
According to the AMA, an explanation of benefits to plaintiff Sandra Peters and emails between the companies’ employees showed Aetna used code 97039 to charge Ms. Peters an administrative fee when billing for a chiropractic visit.
According to the AMA, a lower court decision ruled: “Optum is the provider of the network, the [explanation of benefits] identifies Optum as the ‘provider’ for the service and reports a total ‘amount billed’ which includes the flat-rate contractual fee to Optum and the CPT code required by the Aetna-Optum contracts. … Under the Aetna-Optum relationship, Optum receives payments only from Aetna itself, never from an Aetna member or plan sponsor.”
In calling on the court to overturn the decision, the AMA said the defendants didn’t legitimately choose a CPT code, they aren’t a provider like a physician or hospital, and as an Aetna member, Ms. Peters was asked to pay the administrative charge.
Read more here.
More articles on healthcare finance:
Woman sued by Alabama hospital over $31K bill: ‘I wish you’d have let me die’
U of Vermont Health Network blames operating loss on Epic install
Aetna draws criticism for automatic down-codes for office visits
Becker’s 3rd Annual Fall Chief Pharmacy Officer Summit is the top tier event that the people leading the future of pharmacy convene. This 3-day event is built specifically for Chief Pharmacy Officers and senior pharmacy leaders. The sessions examine the workforce, financial and clinical priorities shaping pharmacy today. Becker’s is where candid discussions flourish and new ideas thrive. Becker's 3rd Annual Fall Chief Pharmacy Officer Summit
