Billing Practices Among US Tobacco Use Treatment Providers.

J Addict Med

Alpert Medical School of Brown University (ELB); Rhode Island Hospital (ELB, LEH); Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Nicotine Dependence Center (MVB); Steeplechase Cancer Center at Robert Wood Johnson Barnabas Health University Hospital Somerset (CK); University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine (AOG, CR-M); Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School (MBS); Florida State University College of Medicine Tobacco Program (MD); Fire Department of the City of New York Tobacco Treatment Program, IQuit Smoking at Jersey City Medical Center RWJ Barnabas (MPB); Business Practices Committee of the Association for the Treatment of Tobacco Use and Dependence (ATTUD) (ELB, MVB, CK, AOG, CR-M, MBS, MD, MPB).

Published: October 2019

Objectives: The US Affordable Care Act (ACA) now requires almost all health insurance plans to cover tobacco use treatment (TUT), but TUT remains underutilized.

Methods: We conducted an anonymous online survey of US TUT providers in 2016 regarding their billing practices.

Results: Participants (n = 131) provided services primarily in medical and behavioral health settings and were from a variety of professions. Most provided intensive individual (>15 minutes per session) and/or group counseling. Although most reported that their organization accepted at least 1 form of insurance, only 34% reported that TUT services were billed, with about equal proportions endorsing billing under their own independent tax ID and "incident to" billing under a supervisor. Half of billers (52%) reported using at least 1 Current Procedural Terminology code. The most common codes were 99406 and 99407, but 18 unique codes were specified. Themes of qualitative responses (n = 101) included concern about how to initiate and sustain adequate reimbursement, and experiences with billing not being "worth" the time or effort.

Conclusions: Overall, results demonstrate a need for providers, administrators, and billing managers to work collaboratively. Even with the ACA mandate, and consistent with prior reports, reimbursement rates may be inadequate for intensive counseling. Areas for advocacy include recognizing that TUT requires similar intensity, expertise, and reimbursement as other substance use disorders and chronic medical conditions; giving Tobacco Treatment Specialists the ability to bill independently; and improving coordination between intensive therapies validated in research and "real-world" logistics.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ADM.0000000000000423DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

tobacco treatment
12
billing
6
tut
5
billing practices
4
practices tobacco
4
treatment providers
4
providers objectives
4
objectives affordable
4
affordable care
4
care aca
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!