The purposes of this study were 1) to review the Medical Nutrition Therapy (MNT) Act of the United States, 2) to introduce the efforts of the American Dietetic Association (ADA) to expand the Medicare coverage for MNT and 3) to provide information about the reimbursement under Medicare Part B for the cost of MNT. The MNT Act defined MNT services as "the nutritional diagnostic, therapeutic, and counseling services provided by a Registered Dietitian or nutritional professional for the purpose of managing diabetes or renal diseases". Also, the MNT Act defined "conditions for coverage of MNT", "limitations on coverage of MNT", and "qualifications of MNT service provider". To expand the coverage of Medicare to include MNT, the ADA realized the need for development of a protocol for MNT, as well as studies to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the MNT protocol developed. Therfore, the ADA supported the studies to develop a strong database of scientific investigations of nutritional services. Furthermore, the ADA needed credible data that could be used by policy makers, so the ADA contracted with the Lewin Group to carry out the study to gather the additional data needed to strengthen the ADA's position. In the report of the Lewin Group, which was entitled, "The Cost of Covering Medical Nutrition Therapy under Medicare: 1998 through 2004", it was concluded, that if coverage for MNT in the Part B portion of Medicare had begun in 1998, by 2004, approximately $ 2.3 billion would have been saved through reduced hospital spending under Part A of Medicare ($ 1.2 billion) and reduced physician visits under Part B ($ 1.1 billion). Effective January 1 2002, the US Congress extended Medicare coverage to include MNT to beneficiaries with diabetes or renal diseases. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) established the duration and frequency for the MNT based on published reports or generally accepted protocols (for example, protocols suggested by the ADA). The number of hours covered by Medicare is 3 hours for the initial MNT and 2 hours for a follow-up MNT. In 2002, a Medicare coverage policy was made to define the Physician's Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes 97802, 97803, and 97804 for MNT.
Administrative Personnel ; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (U.S.) ; Counseling ; Current Procedural Terminology ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Medicare Part B ; Medicare* ; Nutrition Therapy* ; Nutritionists ; United States

With the number of long-term care facilities in Korea increasing substantially, their quality and evaluation system has been an issue of concern. Policy makers need to consider critical aspects relating to health outcomes and client satisfaction when evaluating quality in long-term care. This requires a substantial amount of information gathered from a system of inspection, survey, data, and feedback. This study reviews the characteristics of Online Survey Certification and Reporting system (OSCAR) and the survey instrument used by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in the U.S. and introduces the history of the U.S. nursing home (NH) inspection/survey system. OSCAR is administered by state agencies that contract with CMS and collect data through onsite inspections of facilities approximately once per year. The major components of OSCAR data are facility characteristics, resident characteristics, and survey deficiencies including scope and severity. We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of OSCAR, the primary source of information on the performance of all Medicare/Medicaid certified facilities, including a comparison of resident health outcome evaluation measurement between Korea's assessment tool and OSCAR. Introduction of a data collection system that includes a periodic survey process similar to OSCAR may help policy makers gain a better understanding of the NH industry in Korea and address shortcomings of the system.
Administrative Personnel ; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (U.S.) ; Certification ; Contracts ; Data Collection ; Humans ; Korea ; Long-Term Care ; Nursing Homes ; United States

BACKGROUND: The APACHE scoring system of the Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA) has been being used for serious patients. The scoring system is composed of acute physiologic variables and chronic disease. METHODS: Among patients who underwent emergency operations from 1992 to 1997 because of gastrointestinal perforation, we analyzed 110 cases with five kinds of diseases: duodenal ulcer perforation, small bowel perforation, perforated appendicitis, gastric ulcer perforation and colon perforation. RESULTS: The results were as follows: 1) The preoperative APACHE II scores ranged from 0 to 21. The scores of 64 cases (60.9%) were from 0 to 5. 2) There were no death in case for which pre-peration APACHE II score was from 0 to 10, 25% of the mortality occurred in cases with scores from 11 to 15, 50% in those with scores from 16 to 20, and 100% in those with scores above 21. 3) The APACHE II score decreased continuously from the 3rd to the 7th postoperative day. 4) The preoperative APACHE II scores in gastric ulcer perforation patients were significantly higher than those in duodenal ulcer perforation patients. In the cases of gastric and duodenal ulcer perforations, the APACHE II scores in patients who underwent primary closure were higher than the scores in those who underwent a more definitive operation. 5) In death cases, all of their APACHE II scores were higher at the 3rd postoperative than at the 7th postoperative day, but their APACHE III scores continuously increased postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: It is thought that the APACHE scoring system is more reliable than clinical experience in the classification of patients by operative risk and in estinating the result and giving a prognosis. Thus, the principle of treatment should be established by estinating patient's score before the operation. Careful preoperative management is necessary for patients with scores more than 10. Because patientswith scores more than 21 have very a high mortality, operative time and method must be carefully decided. The APACHE III scoring system seems to be more sensitive than the APACHE II scoring system in predicting deaths and further investigations and clinical applications should be performed.
APACHE* ; Appendicitis ; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (U.S.) ; Chronic Disease ; Classification ; Colon ; Duodenal Ulcer ; Emergencies ; Humans ; Mortality ; Operative Time ; Prognosis ; Stomach Ulcer

OBJECTIVES: We design and develop an electronic claim system based on an integrated electronic health record (EHR) platform. This system is designed to be used for ambulatory care by office-based physicians in the United States. This is achieved by integrating various medical standard technologies for interoperability between heterogeneous information systems. METHODS: The developed system serves as a simple clinical data repository, it automatically fills out the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS)-1500 form based on information regarding the patients and physicians' clinical activities. It supports electronic insurance claims by creating reimbursement charges. It also contains an HL7 interface engine to exchange clinical messages between heterogeneous devices. RESULTS: The system partially prevents physician malpractice by suggesting proper treatments according to patient diagnoses and supports physicians by easily preparing documents for reimbursement and submitting claim documents to insurance organizations electronically, without additional effort by the user. To show the usability of the developed system, we performed an experiment that compares the time spent filling out the CMS-1500 form directly and time required create electronic claim data using the developed system. From the experimental results, we conclude that the system could save considerable time for physicians in making claim documents. CONCLUSIONS: The developed system might be particularly useful for those who need a reimbursement-specialized EHR system, even though the proposed system does not completely satisfy all criteria requested by the CMS and Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC). This is because the criteria are not sufficient but necessary condition for the implementation of EHR systems. The system will be upgraded continuously to implement the criteria and to offer more stable and transparent transmission of electronic claim data.
Ambulatory Care ; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (U.S.) ; Electronic Health Records ; Electronics ; Electrons ; Fees and Charges ; Health Level Seven ; Humans ; Insurance ; Malpractice ; Medical Informatics ; Relative Value Scales ; United States

BACKGROUND: Nursing home resident care is an ongoing topic of public discussion, and there is great interest in improving the quality of resident care. This study investigated the association between nursing home employees' job satisfaction and residents' satisfaction with care and medical outcomes. METHODS: Employee and resident satisfaction were measured by questionnaire in 175 skilled nursing facilities in the eastern United States from 2005 to 2009. Facility-level data on residents' pressure ulcers, medically unexplained weight loss, and falls were obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Long-Term Care Minimum Data Set. The association between employee satisfaction and resident satisfaction was examined with multiple and multilevel linear regression. Associations between employee satisfaction and the rates of pressure ulcers, weight loss, and falls were examined with simple and multilevel Poisson regression. RESULTS: A 1-point increase in overall employee satisfaction was associated with an increase of 17.4 points (scale 0–100) in the satisfaction of residents and family members (p < 0.0001) and a 19% decrease in the incidence of resident falls, weight loss, and pressure ulcers combined (p < 0.0001), after adjusting for staffing ratio and percentage of resident-days paid by Medicaid. CONCLUSION: Job satisfaction of nursing home employees is associated with lower rates of resident injuries and higher resident satisfaction with care. A supportive work environment may help increase quality of care in the nation's nursing homes.
Accidental Falls ; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (U.S.) ; Dataset ; Humans ; Incidence ; Job Satisfaction ; Linear Models ; Long-Term Care ; Medicaid ; Nursing Homes* ; Nursing* ; Pressure Ulcer ; Skilled Nursing Facilities ; United States ; Weight Loss

Health technology assessment was first introduced to the Republic of Korea in 2006 by amending the Medical Services Act. The Committee of New Health Technology Assessment (CNHTA) is the ministerial committee that has the responsibility of reviewing the safety and effectiveness of new health technology. CNHTA review plays a gatekeeping role for new health technology in Korea, which can increase the burden on patients in Korea, either by out-of pocket payments or co-pays for National Health Insurance covered service. This kind of gatekeeping is a function of the healthcare system in many countries where no financial cap such as a fixed budget or diagnosis-related group payment is applied. However, it has been argued that gatekeeping works against industrial promotion policy. The one-stop service introduced in 2014 is a system similar to US parallel review between the US Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. This service provides a simultaneous process of regulatory review by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety, identification of existing technology by the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Services, and new health technology assessment by the National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency and the Ministry of Health and Welfare. This service is expected to reduce the total review process by 3 to12 months. A limited health technology appointment service was introduced in April 2014. This service designates orphan health technologies and health technologies for rare and incurable diseases and supports evidence development at designated hospitals. Several countries have similar systems: US Coverage with Evidence Development, Canadian Conditionally Funded Field Evaluation, UK Only in Research, and many others. The future direction of Health technology assessment should focus on the life cycle management of health technology. A consistent, continuous, and transformative mechanism to manage from the research and development of health technology to delisting obsolete technology to make room for new innovative technology is warranted.
Biomedical Technology* ; Budgets ; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (U.S.) ; Child ; Child, Orphaned ; Delivery of Health Care ; Diagnosis-Related Groups ; Financial Management ; Gatekeeping ; Humans ; Insurance, Health ; Korea ; Life Cycle Stages ; National Health Programs ; Republic of Korea ; United States Food and Drug Administration